0:00

When we study physics, we must

0:02

go beyond the self-imposed limits of

0:04

what a discipline can call reality.

0:06

That changes everything. I'm a physicist

0:09

and therefore I study how physical

0:11

reality works with a sense that

0:13

that's all there is. I was

0:15

also expecting if I did everything

0:18

right, I should be happy. But

0:20

I was not happy. One

0:22

night I wake up and all of a sudden out

0:24

of my chest, this

0:27

beam of energy is coming from

0:29

me. The essence of what I

0:31

thought that I am changed from this way

0:33

to that way. I decided that's what I

0:35

want to do for the rest of my

0:37

life. Unite physics and spirituality. If

0:39

you look at yourself, what is the

0:42

deepest longing that you have? The deepest

0:44

longing that I have myself is to

0:46

know myself, to know why am I

0:48

here? What is this universe for? To

0:50

know. Consciousness is the capacity of one

0:52

to know itself. And it

0:54

is in this one wants to

0:56

know itself that there is the

0:58

joining of physics and spirituality. Let

1:01

me explain. Hey

1:08

everyone, welcome back to Know Thyself.

1:10

Today we're sitting down with a

1:12

physicist, inventor, and entrepreneur. Everyone

1:14

watching this discussion is doing so

1:16

using the Silicon Gate technology our

1:18

guest today invented. Chips

1:20

evolved from his first commercial microprocessor.

1:23

He was also the first to

1:25

invent touchpads and touchscreens. He

1:27

went on to build neural network

1:29

architecture in the 80s attempting to

1:31

create consciousness through computers. He

1:34

is probably one of the

1:36

most well-rounded idealists alive. He

1:38

embodies an incredibly rare combination

1:40

of hard-nosed scientifically informed thought

1:42

with direct introspective insights into

1:44

the primacy of consciousness. We'll

1:47

be exploring what is consciousness, why it

1:49

cannot be explained from the materialist view,

1:51

his emerging new theory that changes the

1:53

idea of who we are in a

1:56

fundamental way and restores meaning and

1:58

purpose to the universe that... materialism

2:00

has essentially denied. We

2:03

live in a time where the

2:05

collective awareness and understanding around fundamental

2:07

questions of reality, such as science,

2:09

consciousness, meaning, and more are transitioning,

2:11

they're deepening, they're being revolutionized, and

2:14

it's an exciting time to be

2:16

alive. When wanting to understand

2:18

how the physical universe works and its limits

2:20

and what's beyond it, I don't know if

2:22

I could have a better person be sitting

2:25

in discussion with today than someone who is

2:27

an individual at the forefront, truly with a

2:29

cutting edge knowledge to synthesize our

2:31

understanding of science, consciousness, and life.

2:33

Federico Fagin, thank you so much

2:36

for being here. It's

2:38

a pleasure to be here, Andre. Thank you for

2:40

inviting me. I'm really looking forward to this conversation.

2:42

Like I said in the intro, you

2:45

really have this unique rare combination

2:47

of the scientific understanding and the

2:49

limits of the physical universe with

2:52

also the interiority and personal experience.

2:54

And I would actually love to

2:56

just jump straight to your kind

2:58

of awakening experience that you had

3:00

that really was the pivot, the

3:02

shift from being a materialist scientist

3:05

and to exploring consciousness in a much more

3:07

fundamental way. So could you walk us through

3:09

your experience at that moment? Yeah,

3:11

I need to give you perhaps a

3:14

little bit of background because I'm a

3:17

physicist and therefore I study how

3:22

physical reality works and with

3:25

a sense that that's

3:28

all there is. And that's really

3:31

pretty much what science

3:33

today is

3:36

telling us about the reality.

3:38

And I

3:40

had accepted that that must be

3:42

true. And

3:45

I was also expecting that if

3:47

I did everything right, quote

3:50

unquote, whatever that means, I

3:53

should be happy. And

3:57

that did not turn out that way. In fact,

3:59

I did. I did everything right, you know, according to

4:01

the book. But I was

4:03

not happy, and I was pretending to be happy.

4:06

And it was only because I realized that

4:09

I was pretending to be happy, and

4:12

I had learned being an entrepreneur, I had

4:14

learned to take responsibility for what happened in

4:16

my life, that I put

4:19

my foot down and said, no, I

4:22

must understand why I'm not happy. In

4:26

those days, I was studying consciousness, I

4:29

was working on neural networks, I

4:33

was studying books in neuroscience,

4:35

and I wanted to understand how

4:39

come that we are conscious. You know,

4:41

neuroscientists don't tell us how

4:44

we're conscious. They explain, you

4:46

know, they explain how we work

4:48

by electrical signals and biochemical

4:50

signals in the brain. And

4:54

I didn't see how I could

4:56

possibly get

4:59

sensations and feelings, what philosophers

5:01

call qualia, out of

5:03

electrical signals. And

5:05

so I was really curious, being

5:08

a scientist and being also a technologist,

5:11

I wanted to understand how I could

5:13

program a computer to be

5:15

conscious. And the more

5:17

I thought, the more impossible it was,

5:19

because there is nothing in physics that

5:21

tells you how to

5:23

convert electrical signals or

5:26

bits in a computer into sensations

5:28

and feelings. So the core was

5:30

what are sensations and feelings, which

5:32

is how we experience life. And

5:36

so it was in this climate where I

5:38

was unhappy, which is also a problem of

5:40

consciousness, I wanted to understand

5:42

what consciousness is. And

5:44

it happened one night, 1990

5:47

was Christmas holidays, was

5:49

skiing up in the Sarah's, you know, Tahoe

5:53

with my family. And one night

5:55

I wake up, midnight was

5:57

thirsty, went to get a glass of

5:59

wine. and

8:01

the connection with everything was

8:03

all in this holistic experience. So

8:06

I was one,

8:09

observing itself with my point of view.

8:12

That's what I'm saying now, but

8:14

at that time I had exactly the

8:16

sense without the words to

8:19

say what I just said. So

8:21

that explanation you just gave is incredible.

8:24

I think it is possibly

8:27

one of the only

8:30

thing that could transform someone's rational

8:32

mind of trying to

8:34

reduce life and phenomena

8:36

into a series of explainable parts.

8:39

You had the interiority experience, which

8:41

the Eastern wisdom traditions have been

8:43

speaking to for millennia, but

8:45

haven't had the science to make it rigorous. And

8:48

what I really love in having conversations

8:50

around consciousness in this podcast, like Don

8:52

Hoffman recently and yourself and

8:54

others that have

8:56

these experiences, these meditative experiences that

8:59

point to a reality that feels

9:01

far more vast than anything we

9:03

could deduce intellectually. And

9:05

so the conjunction of both is really exciting to

9:08

me. So let's

9:10

keep diving deeper here. As

9:12

this experience happened, how

9:14

then did your rational mind start to pivot

9:16

in what you were doing in the world?

9:19

Because you were somebody who

9:21

was very successful in the fruits

9:23

of your labor, in the classical

9:25

physicalist model, right? And then

9:27

from this experience afterwards, your energies and

9:30

minds started to change into exploring more how

9:32

consciousness could be more fundamental,

9:35

constituent of the universe. And so

9:38

from that moment forward, what were the coming years

9:40

and decades? What did that look like for you as

9:43

you started to change what

9:45

you were studying in your field of

9:47

expertise? Yeah, the

9:50

essence of what I am, what

9:53

I thought that I am changed from

9:55

this way to that way. So

9:58

before I thought I was separate. from

10:01

everything, from the universe. I

10:04

thought that to prove something, you had

10:06

to show a theorem and

10:08

go through the logical

10:11

proof of a theorem, that that

10:13

was the highest certainty that you could

10:16

have is by demonstrating a theorem. That

10:20

knowing that came, I was

10:23

asking what is consciousness, that

10:25

it was, I realized much

10:27

later that asking was a prayer. I

10:31

didn't know that I was praying, but I wanted

10:33

to know. I have

10:35

taken responsibility for myself and I wanted

10:37

to know. I

10:41

got the answer. That answer

10:43

was so unbelievably impossible

10:46

to imagine, to

10:48

me, that once you have

10:51

this thing, you know

10:53

that it must be true that

10:55

way. This is direct experience of

10:57

who you are. How

10:59

more do you need? But of

11:01

course it doesn't give you a formula. It's

11:04

not a number or a series of

11:06

numbers. Is

11:08

how we really know, how consciousness

11:10

knows. And so

11:12

that was for me, wow. My

11:15

rational mind would probably, if

11:18

it wasn't so powerful as an experience, I

11:20

would have said, well, I need to see

11:22

a psychiatrist now. If I

11:24

was really believing the story that I

11:26

was believing before, I

11:29

would have probably said, I need to see a

11:31

psychiatrist because something like this is crazy. But

11:34

that's the interesting shift is that we

11:37

go from needing to intellectually

11:39

rationalize things to having the immediacy

11:41

of the experience, which is self-evident.

11:44

It's like, you know it. So there's that gnosis,

11:46

the intelligence of the body that knows, that

11:49

I feel like in the Western mind, we've really

11:51

lost being in

11:53

touch with. Of course. And that's

11:55

the fundamental difference between the

11:58

rational mind, the one. to

12:00

arrive at the truth, but

12:02

you never arrive at the truth if you start

12:04

with truth that are assumed to be true, which

12:06

is the postulates that you start with. So

12:10

it's foolish to believe that you can

12:12

get to the truth if

12:14

you start with truth that you cannot demonstrate. So,

12:17

you know, but we, our

12:19

consciousness is the truth engine,

12:22

is the one that can tell you whether it's

12:24

true or not, but it doesn't give you the

12:26

proof, and then you have

12:28

to know also how to read your

12:31

experiences. So it took a number of

12:33

years of studying,

12:36

by studying consciousness, how? By

12:39

experiencing myself. That's the only way that you

12:41

know consciousness. You don't read it. Books don't

12:43

tell you what consciousness is on top of

12:45

it. So I

12:47

went through 20 years of personal work

12:49

starting with meditation on and on and

12:51

on. You know, teachers came

12:53

and went, you know, in this process,

12:56

and it took about 20 years. So that takes us to

12:58

about 2008 or so, 2009, when

13:03

I was clear to

13:05

me that consciousness

13:07

must be fundamental, conscious

13:09

and free will, because to me free will

13:11

and conscious were parts and parts of the

13:13

same thing. So that

13:16

was so clear that

13:18

at that point, I wanted then to

13:20

connect what I knew about physics

13:24

into a theory that would

13:26

connect the interiority and the

13:28

exteriority. Physics only describes

13:30

what you can measure in the

13:32

space and time. But

13:35

what you can feel is that

13:37

in space and time cannot possibly be

13:39

space and time. So where

13:41

is it? And so

13:43

that was the journey where

13:45

I dedicated myself 100%,

13:48

I decided to, that's it. That's what I want to do for

13:50

the rest of my life. Unite

13:53

physics and spirituality into

13:56

a seamless whole where

13:59

you can no longer tell. the boundaries between

14:01

one and the other. And

14:03

it is the most exciting time to be

14:05

alive, at least I feel, where the unification

14:07

of science and spirit is becoming one. We're

14:09

seeing how there are different ways of looking

14:12

at the same thing, right? And, you

14:15

know, I think there are countless

14:17

people that have these inner luminous

14:19

experiences, the experience of their interconnectedness

14:21

and oneness with all reality. And

14:23

it can also be equally misleading

14:27

where the mind wants to interpret certain

14:29

things that we might have

14:31

different prejudices or beliefs that will be fulfilling

14:33

that, or looking through

14:35

the lens of those beliefs through to

14:37

describe what the experience is, which is

14:39

also equally dangerous if your goal

14:42

is to get in touch with objective reality.

14:44

And so that's why I love diving

14:46

into these conversations where we're kind of,

14:49

we're teeter tottering between both the exterior

14:51

understanding and the interior experience, finding the

14:53

concilieness between the two, hopefully coming to

14:55

a deeper understanding of it all. Now,

14:58

as we dive deeper and deeper into

15:00

the many nuances of this conversation, I

15:03

would love to lay the framework and

15:05

just some definitions to start around how

15:07

you personally define consciousness, the classical and

15:09

quantum view. That way, when we use

15:11

different words throughout this podcast, everybody can

15:13

understand we're on the same boat of

15:15

what we're speaking to. So if you

15:17

would, how you define consciousness. And

15:19

then also we spoke to a little bit the classical

15:21

and quantum view. Yeah, consciousness

15:23

is the capacity of one,

15:26

the totality of what exists to

15:29

know itself. So

15:32

it's the capacity to know by

15:34

self-reflection. But the interesting thing

15:36

in the way I look at this is

15:39

that when one wants to know itself,

15:44

and in fact, we need to start

15:46

with a postulate because otherwise we run

15:49

around this thing and we never get to

15:51

it. So the postulate

15:53

that I'm using is one, one

15:58

is the totality of what exists. exists, what

16:01

potentially can exist, and what actually

16:04

exists. And I make a

16:06

clear distinction because you cannot

16:08

get something from nothing. Many theories

16:10

of reality start with nothing, and

16:12

you get something. I

16:15

do not believe that that's correct. Yet

16:18

to start with some potentiality, that

16:20

becomes actuality. So

16:23

when one is holistic, meaning

16:25

it's not made of separable

16:27

part. Everything is interconnected within

16:29

one. I mean, this goes

16:32

back to the way that

16:34

I mean, but it

16:36

was very clear to me that that

16:38

lack of separation was fundamental in my

16:40

first experience, the awakening experience. I was

16:43

not separate, I was the observer and

16:45

the observed. There is

16:47

no separation between the two, but that's also

16:49

what quantum physics is saying. There is no

16:52

observer separate from what is observed. Quantum

16:55

physics, it's very clear about that. So

16:59

one is holistic, one is

17:02

dynamic. It's never the same instant

17:04

after system. Instant is basically, it's

17:06

always changing. So

17:08

far I've described quantum physics, what

17:10

quantum physics said, no classical physics,

17:12

quantum physics. And

17:15

then I'm adding one wants to know itself.

17:18

And it is in this one

17:20

wants to know itself that there

17:22

is the joining of physics and

17:24

spirituality. It is the knowing itself.

17:28

So if you believe that

17:30

one needs to know itself,

17:32

then one cannot be omniscient,

17:34

because otherwise it would know everything already. And

17:37

there would be no evolution. We

17:40

wouldn't be here certainly. So one

17:43

wants to know itself means that one will

17:45

have to continue to know itself, because we

17:47

know within ourselves that the more you know,

17:49

the more there is to know, because the

17:52

more connections between what we have known exist.

17:54

And so there is an explosion of self

17:57

knowing that can occur. differential

26:00

equations, for example, in an algebraic

26:02

equation, just by using complex

26:05

numbers. You can simplify the computation. So

26:08

just operationally you can find that

26:10

out. But what is a complex

26:12

number? In quantum

26:14

physics, a complex number represents

26:16

a probability amplitude, but

26:19

a probability requires consciousness. It

26:22

is a concept of consciousness. In

26:25

other words, only consciousness wants to predict

26:27

the future. In a

26:29

classical system, since the classical system

26:31

is deterministic, there is

26:34

nothing that tells you why you should predict

26:37

the future. In a classical system, the

26:39

prediction of the future of a conscious

26:41

being is

26:43

needed because the conscious

26:45

being wants to predict

26:47

what will happen, not

26:49

having enough information about what will

26:52

happen. In

26:54

quantum physics, there is the collapse of the

26:56

wave function, which is not a mathematical function.

26:59

It is pure randomness,

27:01

non-algorithmic, which is

27:03

the one that decides what will

27:05

manifest out of what you can

27:08

compute, which are only the probabilities

27:10

of all the possible positions,

27:13

for example, of a particle. But

27:15

the actual position is an act of

27:17

free will in this

27:19

new theory that we can

27:22

get into later. But I

27:24

don't want to go too much into math,

27:26

but fundamentally, this theory is

27:28

simply saying that consciousness

27:32

must exist. You have to start with

27:35

consciousness and with free will, like a

27:37

postulate, and from there you can explain

27:39

why quantum physics has the crazy property

27:41

that it has. The

27:44

physicists are the

27:46

first one to tell you we don't

27:48

understand why quantum physics is the way

27:50

it is. Why is there the collapse

27:52

of the wave function? Why do we

27:54

have states that are expressing

27:57

probabilities, probability amplitudes? that don't even

27:59

exist in space and time. Why

28:01

do we have to have that?

28:03

Nobody understands. This theory explains

28:06

why, because there is consciousness and there

28:08

is free will. Okay,

28:10

so we just opened up many things here, the nature

28:12

of free will, consciousness

28:14

being fundamental. I would love for you

28:16

to break down your distinction between classical,

28:19

I guess, idealism versus monism,

28:22

and yeah, your framework of consciousness being fundamental.

28:24

And then there's a lot to open up

28:26

right after that. But if you'd just love

28:28

to give a quick overview. Yeah, well,

28:31

basically in this theory, there

28:34

are three levels of reality. The

28:37

fundamental reality, which

28:40

is described by quantum

28:42

physics, the quantum

28:44

states in Hilbert space, in

28:46

this n-dimensional space, that

28:50

is the reality where

28:52

conscious experiences are. The

28:55

quantum state is a

28:57

representation of a conscious experience

28:59

of qualia. So

29:05

it's the best thing that mathematics can

29:07

get you to represent qualia, which is not a set

29:09

of numbers, because

29:12

probabilities are not numbers. They

29:15

refer to something else. They refer to something that

29:17

might happen. They don't refer to what is. So

29:22

you cannot call it a probability as

29:24

a number. It is not itself

29:26

a reality. It

29:29

is pointing to the probability of

29:31

a reality. But the reality is

29:33

the experience or the

29:35

being of the conscious entity,

29:37

which is a field that is described. But

29:42

the experience can only be known by the entity, cannot

29:44

be known by the mathematics, cannot be described by

29:46

the mathematics. You see, we have a level of

29:49

experience we

29:51

have a level of reality that mathematics

29:53

cannot reach. That is

29:55

the key here. Yeah, truth transcends proof

29:57

in a way. Absolutely. I

30:00

was trying myself to explain

30:02

consciousness with quantum

30:04

physics, even though I realized

30:06

that consciousness was fundamental and so on.

30:09

And I told myself, I'm foolish to

30:11

believe that. We need to

30:13

turn it around. Consciousness must exist

30:15

from the very beginning, like I had

30:19

seen and free will had

30:22

to be also. Our

30:24

properties of fields, they're not

30:26

properties of things. They're

30:28

properties of fields. And

30:30

the fields don't exist in space and time. Space

30:33

and time emerges from those fields. So

30:36

if you start that way, all of

30:39

a sudden, you can explain

30:41

also why you have to have free

30:43

will, which are then how the field

30:45

decides what to manifest by

30:48

going from probability. The theory would

30:50

say you go from probability to

30:52

an actuality. The actual, what's actually

30:54

happened, the field makes a free

30:56

will decision and manifests what actually

30:59

will manifest, that you can measure in space

31:01

and time. But it

31:03

is a free will decision. So there is no

31:05

math that can tell you what that decision is

31:08

going to be. So all

31:10

of a sudden, you have a completely different

31:13

conception of reality. So

31:15

there is, go back

31:17

to the original question, there is this

31:20

foundational reality. Then there is

31:22

the classical reality of just the moving

31:24

space and time. Those are

31:26

derivatives of this deeper reality. And

31:30

derivative on this deeper reality based

31:32

on decision, free will decision of

31:35

conscious entities. And

31:37

there is the body. The body

31:39

is a bridge between this deeper

31:42

reality and the classical reality. The

31:44

body is quantum and classical. The

31:47

body is characterized by the type

31:49

of information which are called live

31:51

information, which is neither

31:53

quantum information nor classical information.

31:56

It's something deeper that is not being

31:59

described by other physicists. is so far

32:01

is just a new, is a basic

32:03

idea that has to be that

32:05

way. Essentially, the

32:08

best way to imagine it is like

32:11

my words are waves. My

32:13

words are waves. They are dynamic

32:15

and they convey a lot more

32:17

information than when I

32:19

write down what I'm saying. When I write

32:22

down what I'm saying, those are static symbols.

32:25

They have lost all the rest of my

32:27

emotions and whatever this

32:30

dynamic wave can carry.

32:38

Live information, live symbols are just

32:40

like spoken words. Classical

32:43

symbols are like written words

32:46

in a book. There

32:49

is a big difference in the capacity

32:51

to express meaning because the

32:54

meaning is what exists in the

32:57

deeper reality. There is no information. There

32:59

is meaning. It's the meaning of the

33:01

information in the deeper

33:03

reality. In the outer reality, there is

33:05

only classical information which is symbols, numbers.

33:08

There are numbers here, non-numbers

33:11

here, qualia here, and comprehension of

33:13

qualia in the deeper reality. The

33:17

body is a bridge that allows

33:19

this deeper reality to communicate with

33:21

this classical reality through the body.

33:24

A quick share. Did you know

33:27

that you are a walking community and

33:29

that the roughly 38 trillion bacteria

33:31

that live in and on you,

33:33

especially in your gut, are essential to

33:36

whole body health? The balance

33:38

and quality of your microbiome drastically

33:40

affects your skin, mood, digestion, basically

33:42

everything about you, and seeds, DS01

33:44

daily synbiotic benefits your gut, skin,

33:46

and heart health in just two

33:48

capsules a day. I personally have

33:50

noticed improved digestion and gut health

33:52

and I just love that I

33:54

can trust seed because of how

33:56

intentional they are as a brand

33:58

and science back they are. holding

34:01

all 24 clinically and scientifically studied

34:03

strains of bacteria, which support your

34:05

overall wellness, as well as how

34:07

convenient and sustainable their form of

34:09

delivery is with no synthetic or

34:11

chemical coatings, as well as no

34:13

binders or preservatives. You can support

34:15

your gut this summer with SEEDS

34:17

DS01 daily symbiotic. Just go to

34:19

seed.com/know thyself and use code 25

34:21

know thyself. Take

34:23

a 25% off your first month. That's

34:26

25% off your first month

34:28

with SEEDS DS01 daily symbiotic

34:31

at seed.com/know thyself and

34:33

use code 25 know thyself. Hope you

34:35

enjoy, stay healthy, back to the episode.

34:39

So I guess the difference I

34:42

just want to highlight between idealism and monism

34:44

is that instead of just saying that

34:46

consciousness is fundamental in all there is, it's

34:48

viewing matter as a host of consciousness in

34:51

a way. Is that correct? Yeah, look

34:53

at matter this way. My

34:55

theory is a monistic theory, but

34:58

not in the, and I don't want to

35:00

get into these boxes. It tend

35:02

to put things into boxes when frankly,

35:05

when you talk about one where one

35:08

is not made of boxes, everything

35:10

is interconnected with one. So the boxes

35:12

close and close what the boxes supposed

35:15

to contain like a

35:17

set in mathematics. It's

35:19

a closed thing. Something

35:22

belongs or doesn't belong to the set. So

35:24

here we are talking about something, you

35:27

know, that transcends many of

35:29

the mathematical concepts that are

35:31

so foundational in mathematics. So

35:34

here the foundation

35:37

of our capacity to know is

35:43

qualia and comprehension that

35:46

get us to the meaning of information

35:49

and the meaning is

35:52

something that can only be known from the

35:54

inside by the field that

35:57

is the was to know itself. So

36:00

when one creates monads,

36:02

conscious and units, these conscious units have

36:04

the same properties of one to know

36:07

themselves, they want to know themselves, they

36:09

also can procreate other monads, that

36:11

just like one created the monad, created

36:14

the conscious unit. In

36:16

other words, the property of these fields

36:18

are the properties of one, but

36:21

with the one difference, that only

36:24

in one point, this entity only

36:26

can know reality from the point

36:28

of view with which one created

36:30

those entity. Since

36:33

one has potentially

36:35

infinite points of view, then there

36:37

are potentially infinite conscious units, or

36:40

monads, and so there

36:42

are potentially infinite way then that those

36:44

conscious units can combine into higher level

36:46

hierarchies of conscious units. So

36:48

all of a sudden, we have an

36:50

unbelievable structure that

36:53

emerges from knowing, from

36:56

the desire of one to know itself, and

36:58

the fact that knowing and existing are aspects

37:00

of the same thing. Why do you think

37:02

there's a fundamental desire of the one to

37:05

know itself, and in a way, why does

37:07

it need to differentiate to know itself in

37:09

so many different ways? If

37:12

you look at yourself, what is the

37:14

deepest longing that you have? The

37:17

deepest longing that I have myself is to know

37:19

myself, to know why am I here, to

37:21

know what is this universe for?

37:24

To know. So to

37:26

know is the deepest longing the

37:28

human have had. In fact, the

37:30

deepest wisdom and the deepest

37:33

knowing comes from this

37:36

longing, and it has

37:38

given rise to then spirituality,

37:40

then religious, religions,

37:43

and then eventually science. But

37:47

this longing is

37:50

before all of that. This longing is

37:52

there, and science is satisfying

37:54

only the surface longing, the one

37:56

to understand what you can, can

38:00

measure, but somehow

38:05

science has moved away from this spirituality,

38:07

it's not given value

38:10

of reality. I

38:12

would say science with the capital

38:14

S, I would say more like

38:16

scientism or materialism, is given

38:18

only value of reality to what you

38:21

can measure in space and time. So

38:24

basically for this materialistic

38:26

view, there is nothing

38:29

other than matter. But

38:32

that's a starting point, that's a postulate

38:34

that has never been proven. It's

38:37

a postulate to say that there

38:39

is only matter. So

38:43

when you know within yourself that

38:45

there are things that you cannot

38:47

understand, they go way beyond

38:49

what can be measured in space and time, like

38:52

the love that you feel or the courage that

38:54

you feel to take

38:56

action against the beliefs

38:58

system that are around you. So

39:06

it's within that understanding that I've

39:09

heard you share that existence

39:11

knows itself through the experience. And

39:14

so this podcast is

39:16

called Know Thyself. Actually

39:19

one of my highest values is in the

39:21

discovery of who I truly am, who am

39:23

I in the essence of that. And I think

39:25

our audience largely has that desire. I

39:29

think we all fundamentally do. And

39:33

so as we start with the surface level of understanding

39:35

of just the Western-minded view of

39:37

the surface level, I am my body, I am

39:39

my name, we start to see how these things

39:41

we are not. And you can start to go

39:44

down the list of everything from your name, your

39:46

caste, your creed, your ethnicity, none of

39:48

these things are fundamentally you. And so you start

39:50

asking, well, okay, then what actually could I be?

39:52

What is indivisible, you know, in the essence of

39:54

who I truly am? And

39:57

so I think the word that you

39:59

started using... which is seity, is an

40:01

interesting kind of

40:04

distinction. So

40:06

I would love for you to share your definition of

40:08

what that is and how is it

40:10

different from what most people would say

40:12

is a soul, that we have a soul.

40:15

I think there's some distinctions that help

40:18

take it out of the bucket of conceptual understanding

40:20

that we have. With that word of soul, so

40:22

what is seity? Yeah, but let me just say

40:24

one thing to connect with what I said earlier,

40:27

that science is also

40:30

about knowing. So even

40:32

science wants to know, right? But

40:34

they are restricting what they want to know on

40:36

what can be measured in space and time. So

40:39

everything that we do that is

40:42

beyond kind of pure survival is

40:44

about knowing, okay? Science included,

40:46

okay? So back to

40:48

seity. So seity is simply take

40:51

a quantum field of electrons. Quantum

40:55

fields of electrons, well-defining physics,

40:57

okay? Quantum physics. I

40:59

say this quantum field has

41:02

consciousness and has free will. Then

41:04

I call it seity because

41:07

it's not the quantum fields of

41:09

physics, but it is everything

41:12

that physics is saying plus consciousness and

41:14

free will. Now all of a

41:16

sudden you have an entity

41:19

that can evolve and can know itself

41:21

and everything else because it's a part

41:24

all of one. In

41:26

this way of thinking, all

41:29

of a sudden you

41:32

are connecting immediately physics,

41:34

which are the quantum fields

41:36

with spirituality, which is the

41:39

fact that these fields are conscious and

41:41

have free will. Okay,

41:43

great. So I'll just read a quote from your

41:45

book, which is new and not now, by the

41:47

way, we haven't mentioned irreducible second

41:50

to your first book that I've

41:53

been absolutely loving diving into this quote that

41:55

I just wanna read, which is on this

41:57

exact topic. So I believe instead that

41:59

we are... are Saities who temporarily

42:01

inhabit our bodies. We

42:03

are eternal conscious beings rather than

42:05

perishable bodies. And we are

42:08

here to learn crucial aspects of ourselves

42:10

by interacting with each other in the

42:12

physical universe that we have co-created for

42:14

this very purpose. Everything we

42:16

perceive in the universe was initially

42:18

envisioned in the consciousness of the

42:21

Saities because classical reality follows quantum

42:23

reality and not vice versa. And

42:27

quantum physics follows quantum information, which

42:29

in turn represents the thoughts, desires

42:31

and conscious experiences of the Saities.

42:34

Anything you'd like to elaborate there? It was

42:36

pretty thorough. Yeah, it's pretty thorough. I

42:41

think that the crucial thing here is

42:46

to always make the distinction when I say

42:48

I, I don't mean the body. And

42:51

when we say I, we tend

42:53

to generally mean the body. So

42:56

the body is not where consciousness

42:59

exists. The body is a

43:01

quantum classical structure that exists

43:04

in space and time. But

43:06

it's also connected with this quantum

43:10

reality. And that's why it is

43:12

a monism, okay? If

43:15

you take the field of electrons, the

43:17

quantum field of electrons, the

43:19

electrons are not objects

43:21

separate from the fields. They are

43:23

in physics, the quantum physics. And

43:25

the electron is a state of

43:27

a field. It's some

43:29

structure, some form that

43:32

appears in the field itself, just

43:34

like a wave of the sea. A

43:36

wave of the sea is part of

43:38

the sea, cannot be separated from the

43:41

sea. So the properties of

43:43

the wave are actually the properties of the

43:45

field. The properties of

43:47

the electron are the properties of the

43:49

quantum fields of electron, which is conscious

43:53

and has free will. So

43:55

the fact that you cannot separate the

43:57

original matter from the

44:00

field itself, the deeper reality tells

44:02

you that it's a monism. You don't

44:05

have spirit and matter. They

44:09

are all manifestation. Matter is

44:11

a manifestation of spirit. Matter

44:14

is a manifestation of mind. So

44:18

can you help me wrap my mind around

44:21

how a sadie could possess

44:23

individuality? Because when you

44:25

look at the word self, there's many different layers, like

44:27

we said, we could perceive it as, from the body

44:30

to the mind, to

44:32

who we are in a

44:35

more fundamental nature, that is an

44:37

energy that we are inhabiting in

44:39

a physical body temporarily in this

44:42

experience. So this has

44:44

a lot of implications, obviously, and it's congruent

44:46

with, like I said, a lot of Eastern

44:48

wisdom traditions that have been talking about this

44:50

for millennia. So

44:55

what is the practical differentiation in

44:57

how you explain the soul and

44:59

the sadie and what that

45:02

implies to what happens when we

45:04

die, the personality and

45:06

qualities of us that maybe carry over

45:08

once this physical body dies. So

45:11

I'm just curious to see how you kind of think about these things.

45:14

So the

45:17

identity of the sadie, the

45:21

best way to look at that is

45:24

the point of view with which

45:27

one knew itself originally when it

45:29

created this sadie, this field

45:31

that is conscious and has free will, which is

45:33

a part all of one. That

45:36

point of view is the identity,

45:39

is the fact that that field

45:41

will maintain that identity

45:43

forever. So

45:46

it is the, in a way, it

45:48

is imprinted by one in

45:50

its giving birth to this new

45:53

field, which

45:55

is a new self-knowing of

45:57

itself. So one self-knowing,

46:00

creates a part-whole of itself with

46:02

a point of view, which is the identity,

46:05

which is the uniqueness of that field. And

46:08

the uniqueness remains the uniqueness of that

46:10

field forever. That field

46:12

is eternal. Or if

46:14

one is not eternal, he has

46:16

the same duration of one. But

46:20

you know, you can, you know, because that, if

46:22

one wants to know itself, the last thing

46:25

the one wants is to forget, you know,

46:27

what he has learned about itself, right? So

46:29

there has to be a memory of

46:33

self-knowing of one, which is also

46:35

the memory, the self-knowing of the societies

46:37

that are created by one. So

46:39

there has to be a way to remember the

46:43

experience. So, and

46:46

that's another reason why you have

46:48

to have classical information. Classical information

46:51

is information that allows you to

46:53

remember and experience a quantum

46:56

experience, because a quantum state only

46:58

exists for a very short period

47:00

of time. So, so

47:03

you better put in memory what

47:05

you experience, otherwise you forget

47:08

about it. Because the

47:10

next thing that you experience, if

47:12

you didn't put in memory what

47:14

you experienced earlier, it's gone. So,

47:17

you know, it's like, you know, we

47:19

imagine like the present and moves toward the

47:21

future. Well, no, there is no future and

47:24

there is no past. Is

47:26

the past that grows from the present,

47:28

which is the memory of what you had experienced.

47:31

So the past moves the

47:34

back. And the future is

47:36

what actually is the, you know, appears

47:39

in this present. So

47:43

that's a better way to understand time when

47:45

you consider the, you know, who

47:48

we are. And

47:50

that is consistent also with what physics is

47:52

saying, but in a deeper way

47:54

than normally we think of it. So.

48:00

In your first awakening experience, you felt

48:02

like you recognized that you are light.

48:06

And light and love and peace

48:09

and joy. Again,

48:12

there are separation between these

48:14

fundamental concepts. And

48:16

then you felt from

48:19

that experience that you are this one

48:21

point of the one in which it

48:23

knows itself, like a point or a

48:25

dot on a circle in which there

48:27

are potentially infinite amounts of dots that

48:29

could be there. I perceive myself as

48:31

a point of view of one

48:34

upon itself. In other

48:36

words, and the reason why I say that

48:39

is because the sense of me that I

48:41

had in that extraordinary experience was the same

48:43

sense of me that I've always had when

48:45

I was five years old, 30, or at

48:48

that time almost 50. So,

48:50

you know, that sense of me, that's

48:52

my identity. That's who I am. That

48:56

is the self. But

48:59

I call it identity because again, self has

49:01

so many meanings and so I want to

49:03

avoid, I want to use names,

49:06

sati, which is the fact of,

49:08

you know, being a, you know, the selfhood.

49:10

Yeah. And that's

49:13

why the awakening process is often referred

49:15

to as self-realization because you're coming into

49:17

awareness of something that was prior and

49:19

already existed. Absolutely, yeah. Because

49:22

we have memory of our own experience. And

49:25

so we're in the process of remembering. And

49:28

in fact, to know

49:30

something that you already knew

49:33

because you also can know something that you

49:35

didn't know that's new, that's a new creation

49:38

also for you. In other words,

49:40

it isn't that all we know

49:42

is in the past because

49:45

everything new that we know, we create,

49:47

we bring into existence exactly like one

49:49

when knows itself for the first time

49:52

brings into existence what it knows. This

49:55

is valid for everyone. Yeah. So

49:57

then do you think there is this vast

49:59

intelligence is orchestrating in a

50:01

type of way the people, places

50:04

and circumstances for us to garner

50:06

the experience we need to come into that

50:08

self-remembering. But by being part

50:11

whole, we are all orchestrating what

50:13

one wants. You

50:15

see, because if we were

50:17

separate parts, it would be different than there

50:20

would be an orchestrator, but

50:22

we are parts all. But I

50:24

noticed that our body, even our

50:26

body is built the same

50:28

way, is built with parts whole. Let

50:32

me explain. Every cell

50:34

of my body has the genome

50:37

of the egg that

50:40

built the entire organism. So

50:42

every part of my body, every cell, I

50:45

have about 50 trillion, like

50:47

you. I got about 51. Oh,

50:49

that's good. You are

50:51

better than me. So

50:54

your 51 trillion cells, each

50:56

one of them has the

50:59

genome that describes

51:01

the entire organism, not itself.

51:05

Everything, the whole thing, is

51:08

a part whole. The

51:10

potential knowledge of the whole. That's why

51:12

a cell later on in life can

51:15

express aspects of itself that

51:18

were not present at its birth. That's

51:21

why there is, you know,

51:23

epigenetics. 30 years

51:25

ago, it was impossible. Could not exist.

51:27

And now, of course, you know, people

51:29

are beginning to accept that epigenetics exist.

51:32

Epigenetics is that, you know, a

51:35

cell is not determining

51:37

at birth in what it's going to be able

51:39

to express. It can express new things that were

51:41

not present at birth.

51:45

So, you know, the entire understanding

51:47

of who we are is

51:49

appended, and there are people

51:52

that tell you, materialists that tell you

51:54

that the body is just an algorithm,

51:56

you know, biology is just like a

51:58

computer, what the hell. You know,

52:01

no, a computer is made of transistors. They're

52:05

not 50 trillions yet. They

52:07

will be 50 trillion. So what was the big deal?

52:09

A transistor is a switch on off. That's

52:12

all. What does a switch know about

52:14

the whole, the old

52:16

computer and the software that runs in

52:19

the computer? Nothing. Yeah,

52:21

how could there be the sound of

52:23

a crying baby, the sight of a rose,

52:25

the taste of a cherry, these quality that

52:28

can't be in the experience of

52:30

a switch? Andre,

52:32

but this goes beyond that because

52:36

I'm just describing a body as

52:39

a physical structure in space and time, comparing to

52:41

another physical structure in space and time, which is

52:43

a computer, which is a

52:46

purely classical system. The body

52:48

is quantum and classical. The consciousness,

52:50

the feelings are not in the body.

52:52

They are in this field, this deeper

52:54

field. They are

52:56

not in the body. We project them in the

52:58

body. They are not in the body. We are

53:00

not. We, who we are, are

53:02

not the body. We don't exist in space

53:05

and time. We exist in this deeper reality.

53:08

You see, this is, that's why we,

53:10

but we are so indoctrinated

53:14

on one end and so also

53:16

hypnotized into believing that we are

53:18

the body, that we always fall

53:20

into this trap of believing that we are the

53:23

body. Yeah, yeah, yeah. We're so,

53:25

but then when we think about ourselves, we think

53:27

about the body. No, the

53:30

body is just a structure that then perishes.

53:33

If we were the body, then, scientism

53:35

would be right to say that

53:38

when the body dies, it's the end of ourselves, right?

53:41

If consciousness is a property of a

53:43

functioning brain, when the brain doesn't function,

53:48

we shouldn't exist anymore. And

53:50

of course, that's what I believe and I was, what I

53:53

believe in this, in this

53:55

scientism worldview, which

53:57

did not take into account. what

54:00

quantum physics was saying. The

54:02

point is that, that I'm trying to make is

54:05

that quantum physicists are saying something that

54:07

then we'd never reflect in our

54:10

worldview. Yeah.

54:15

So I just want to pick up where

54:17

you were just talking about emotion and how

54:19

emotion carries meaning and this understanding of live

54:22

information. Yeah. This is a very

54:24

kind of new concept, you know, in terms of

54:27

understanding how meaning is a, tied

54:30

to the fundamental constituents of reality, instead

54:34

of like an afterthought or a byproduct, I suppose,

54:36

that we intellectually make. So

54:39

can you share how emotion is tied with

54:41

meaning? Yeah. Just

54:43

think about love. What

54:45

is love bringing to you? I

54:49

mean, beyond the feeling itself,

54:52

you know, there is

54:54

a meaning behind that. The

54:57

qualia is one thing, right? What it

54:59

feels like. That's the qualia. But

55:02

then the qualia, the

55:05

qualia are simply the entry point into

55:07

the inner sanctum, which is, you know,

55:09

this field that can know, that has

55:11

properties that are infinitely

55:14

powerful properties to understand,

55:17

understand means to get the meaning of what?

55:19

Of what you perceive, which is qualia. So

55:22

the meaning is the essence of what you know. And

55:25

it's also what we want to convey when

55:28

we use symbols. I don't

55:30

describe my qualia, I describe the meaning

55:32

of qualia. You know, when I say,

55:35

I love you, am I

55:37

describing what I feel? I cannot describe what I

55:39

feel. So I describe, you

55:41

know, the essence that I call

55:43

love, that, you know, that's the meaning that

55:46

this feeling says for me. But

55:49

it goes deeper because love is a word.

55:51

Love is a symbol, is a word, but

55:54

love to you, if

55:56

you really go into it, it

55:58

has dimensions that are unfastened. But

1:00:00

in reality, there is, you know, we

1:00:03

had to explain why we have a perception of space and

1:00:05

time and where does it come from. And

1:00:08

so, you know, you had to think in

1:00:10

terms of a deeper

1:00:12

reality and space and

1:00:15

time are emergent properties of

1:00:17

this deeper reality as the other way

1:00:19

around. You know, consciousness and

1:00:21

free will are supposed to be actually

1:00:24

free will typically in scientism doesn't

1:00:26

exist. But, you know, in,

1:00:29

you know, consciousness and consciousness

1:00:31

emerges from space and time

1:00:33

and objects that don't have any

1:00:35

of that, okay? But

1:00:38

it is the other way around, you know,

1:00:40

space and time and matters and energy emerge

1:00:43

from this deeper reality. And

1:00:45

so they must be explained in

1:00:48

terms of knowing. Knowing

1:00:50

is deeper than space, time, matter and

1:00:52

energy. Do you think that a conscious

1:00:55

entity can actually know itself in its

1:00:57

entirety? Of course

1:00:59

not. Not even one can know itself

1:01:01

in its entirety. Will continue to know

1:01:03

itself. The more it knows, the more

1:01:06

it can know. So knowing ourselves is

1:01:08

a continual dynamic process. Absolutely, there never

1:01:10

ends. It cannot end. If

1:01:13

it ended, it will be the end of the universe in

1:01:15

a way. In the end of evolution, the end of everything. One

1:01:18

will be finally satisfied. Knows itself

1:01:20

completely and we don't, you know,

1:01:22

we can become subsumed from

1:01:24

one and that will be the end of

1:01:26

it, which is fine too. I

1:01:28

don't really know, but you know, but

1:01:31

it is reasonable to think that

1:01:33

there is, you know, why should time

1:01:35

end? Besides that kind of time,

1:01:37

it is the time that we measure. It's not

1:01:39

the time that I'm talking about. That

1:01:41

time that we're talking about is the present.

1:01:44

The time of experience is that sliver of

1:01:47

present where everything that we

1:01:49

remember, everything that we predict is in that

1:01:52

present. If I make a prediction of what

1:01:54

will happen in the future, that

1:01:56

prediction is done in the present. This

1:02:01

invites a feeling, at least to me

1:02:03

internally, of a lot of spaciousness and

1:02:05

taking pressure off of ourselves on the

1:02:07

spiritual path, because we have in the

1:02:09

West more of this achievement-oriented, goal-oriented mindset

1:02:12

where it's like achieving enlightenment

1:02:14

becomes a point in which our spiritual

1:02:16

journey is like, we've arrived,

1:02:18

you know? Versus you're inviting a

1:02:20

continual journey and let's enjoy the

1:02:22

ride. Of course, of course. But

1:02:25

for me, in a way,

1:02:28

why was I disappointed? Because

1:02:31

I had checked all the boxes and so

1:02:33

I had arrived and I should

1:02:35

have been happy. Yeah, the money, the fame. Because

1:02:37

I had always put happiness in the future because

1:02:39

I was supposed to achieve certain things to

1:02:43

be happy because that was the list of things that

1:02:45

I had to do. But

1:02:48

that was my imagination. And

1:02:52

so once I arrived, I

1:02:55

was unhappy. So what's wrong with

1:02:57

this picture, right? A

1:02:59

quick share from one of our sponsors today,

1:03:02

Element. Element is a tasty

1:03:04

electrolyte drink mix that contains a science-backed

1:03:06

ratio of sodium, potassium, and magnesium that

1:03:08

help you regulate your appetite, curb your

1:03:10

cravings, and improve your brain function. I've

1:03:12

been drinking in Element nearly every day

1:03:14

for the past few years in the

1:03:17

morning while I'm fasted and it's a

1:03:19

game changer. It's got no sugar, no

1:03:21

coloring, no artificial ingredients, no junk that

1:03:23

you don't need, whether you need

1:03:25

to replenish after a workout or just for

1:03:27

overall hydration. Their electrolytes do the perfect job

1:03:29

and they taste delicious. They have many flavors.

1:03:31

Literally all of my friends that I have

1:03:33

put this on, now make it a part

1:03:36

of their daily ritual as well. And

1:03:38

their hot chocolate flavor is incredible. I highly

1:03:40

recommend trying that one out. To

1:03:42

try it out, if you want, you can go

1:03:45

to www.drinkelement.com/know thyself and they'll give you a free

1:03:47

sample pack with your order so you can try

1:03:49

every flavor. And what's awesome is that if you

1:03:51

don't like it, they'll give you a no questions

1:03:53

asked refund and you don't even have to send

1:03:56

the box back. As always, everything

1:03:58

is linked down in the description below. below,

1:04:00

back to the episode. So

1:04:02

I want to talk about this sovereignty,

1:04:04

this reclaiming our spiritual power and the

1:04:06

responsibility we have to do so. I

1:04:08

love this quote I found in your

1:04:10

book around suffering

1:04:14

from Simone Weill that says, "'Suffering as

1:04:17

a door that we can choose to go through and

1:04:20

then we learn something or we refuse

1:04:22

to open and then nothing is added, rather it

1:04:24

takes everything away from us.' And

1:04:26

I feel like we all have these experiences

1:04:28

in life that are challenging and we suffer

1:04:31

and we can grow through suffering or grace, but

1:04:33

oftentimes there's a lot of suffering that points us

1:04:36

into the direction of what's not working for us

1:04:38

in our identity and beliefs and so many different

1:04:40

things in life. And so as the

1:04:42

one desire is to know itself, I

1:04:44

feel, and I would love to get your perspective

1:04:46

as suffering kind of serves as the friction necessary

1:04:50

for us to move into the direction

1:04:52

of experiencing, remembering, realizing

1:04:54

our true self. I

1:04:58

mean, my sense is

1:05:00

that suffering is very

1:05:03

much something that exists in this

1:05:08

quasi virtual reality in which we live and

1:05:11

we believe to be the body and we're

1:05:13

here to learn something

1:05:15

about ourselves that we set

1:05:17

up to learn before

1:05:20

incarnation. So, you know, because

1:05:23

clearly we are not the body, so when the

1:05:25

body dies, we are still the field that we

1:05:27

were before the body was born. So,

1:05:30

you know, we don't go anywhere. We

1:05:32

continue to be the entity that was created

1:05:35

with the point of view that we always

1:05:37

have. When the body

1:05:39

dies, we recover the memories

1:05:42

of other lives that we had in

1:05:45

this reality, maybe

1:05:47

other possible realities, who knows?

1:05:50

But certainly, you know, we

1:05:52

no longer, see, once we

1:05:55

are, we believe

1:05:57

to be the body, to the point that we

1:05:59

pay attention only. to the signals produced by

1:06:01

the body, we become close

1:06:03

in a way. We no longer observe

1:06:06

things that are beyond the

1:06:08

body. We observe only the stuff that

1:06:10

the body produces and we communicate with

1:06:12

the body as ego. The ego is

1:06:14

only a portion of the society who

1:06:16

we are, or this field. It's

1:06:18

that portion of the field that, you

1:06:21

know, in creating

1:06:25

the characteristic of this body

1:06:27

in order to understand itself,

1:06:30

that a portion of itself became, you

1:06:33

know, hypnotized, so

1:06:35

to speak, believing that it is

1:06:37

the body. It is a

1:06:39

little bit like when we control a drone. Suppose

1:06:43

you have goggles and through

1:06:45

these goggles you see and you

1:06:47

hear the information that

1:06:51

a drone is sending you, a drone is

1:06:53

in another country, you know, 10,000 miles away,

1:06:57

and you see what the

1:06:59

drone sees and you hear what the drone hears.

1:07:01

So, and if you are

1:07:04

intense in controlling the drone and getting

1:07:06

the drone to do what you want,

1:07:08

okay, you forget about

1:07:11

whatever is around you, right? And

1:07:13

so the drone, then you are the drone,

1:07:15

you know, you do whatever you're doing and,

1:07:18

you know, then the drone is, you

1:07:20

know, is shot down and this,

1:07:24

you know, nothing here.

1:07:26

You look around and say, my God, I'm

1:07:29

still here. You know,

1:07:31

so the body controlling the drone is

1:07:34

like your conscious field controlling your body.

1:07:37

Okay. It's a good way

1:07:39

to imagine this because the

1:07:41

reality that you see through

1:07:43

the eyes and ears of

1:07:45

the drone is

1:07:49

really, it's, you know,

1:07:51

what are you seeing? You're seeing bits and

1:07:55

those bits are actually, you

1:07:58

know, transformed by the camera. they become

1:08:00

space, they become the objects that

1:08:02

the drone sees, how is that possible?

1:08:06

So if you take the goggles out

1:08:09

and you look at this reality, this reality must be

1:08:11

the same, similar way, right? I

1:08:14

mean, many years ago that was

1:08:16

so clear to me that in

1:08:19

fact that's why, that's because virtual

1:08:21

realities exist, you know, we can

1:08:23

do it with a computer, that

1:08:25

we can actually understand that this

1:08:27

reality cannot be the reality,

1:08:30

real. However,

1:08:32

it is not purely separate

1:08:35

from the deeper reality because,

1:08:37

as I told you earlier,

1:08:40

the states of the fields cannot be

1:08:42

separated from the field. So

1:08:44

this, the virtual reality is still connected with

1:08:46

what we are, is our

1:08:49

emanations of what we are. That's

1:08:51

why the theory is a monism,

1:08:54

like I was saying earlier. So

1:08:57

I personally love that analogy, it's also in reference

1:08:59

to Donald Hoffman, how I

1:09:02

love his headset analogy because it's a very

1:09:04

useful thing that we can wrap our head

1:09:06

around, so to speak, pun

1:09:08

intended. I think where we have a virtual reality

1:09:10

headset and we go into this other reality where

1:09:13

our true self takes on our

1:09:15

sensory system of seeing, smelling, tasting, touching

1:09:17

and hearing, that plugs us into three

1:09:19

dimensional reality where it's very enchanting and

1:09:22

it serves the purpose of having the

1:09:24

experiences we need to know oneself. But

1:09:28

we often get lost in the

1:09:30

veil of that forgetting. And

1:09:33

this whole journey, which we're speaking to, is

1:09:35

the journey of remembering of who we are

1:09:37

beyond the sensory and continual

1:09:40

arising and passing away a phenomena

1:09:42

that we perceive. And

1:09:45

so I feel a really important reflection now

1:09:47

is, all

1:09:49

the people that are listening to this conversation right now

1:09:51

on our journey, there is

1:09:53

a responsibility we have to know oneself. And

1:09:56

the more that we can acknowledge that, the more that

1:09:58

we can tap into that. and embody

1:10:01

that responsibility, the more

1:10:04

that we start to go on that upward spiral

1:10:06

of realization and a lot of the things that

1:10:08

we won't suffer to start to fall away, we

1:10:10

start to become more agents of positive impact and

1:10:12

change in the world. There's so many endless implications

1:10:14

of that change and transformation that happens

1:10:16

internally first and foremost. And

1:10:18

so what do you feel is the responsibility we

1:10:20

have for that awakening process? Yeah,

1:10:23

I think that even

1:10:25

before there

1:10:30

can be an awakening in my way

1:10:32

of thinking. We

1:10:35

have to take responsibility for what happens in

1:10:37

our life. I think that I

1:10:40

could not have had the experience that I had if

1:10:43

I had not taken responsibility for

1:10:45

what happened in my life, where

1:10:48

I was justified in

1:10:50

blaming somebody for

1:10:53

what happened to me. And I was

1:10:56

not looking at how

1:10:58

I contributed to

1:11:01

that person harming

1:11:04

me. So

1:11:07

at one point after this

1:11:09

issue was over, I

1:11:12

asked myself one day, what

1:11:15

did I do? What did I

1:11:17

do to encourage that?

1:11:19

Or why didn't I stop it? What

1:11:21

was my payoff for not stopping? What

1:11:23

was going on? And

1:11:26

it was through that process, it was painful. Through

1:11:29

that process, I realized that

1:11:31

I had an agenda. And

1:11:34

my agenda was that by not doing

1:11:36

something, I was better than

1:11:38

the guy. I

1:11:41

was better because I was more

1:11:43

noble. I was

1:11:45

giving the other cheek. That's

1:11:48

the way I was brought up in

1:11:50

the Catholic ethos. You

1:11:53

basically, if somebody hurts

1:11:55

you, you give the other cheek. It's

1:11:58

silly, right? I mean... I

1:12:01

mean, I took that supposed

1:12:03

teaching, you know, into

1:12:05

a, then if I do

1:12:07

that, I'm better than the other guy. Right. Okay,

1:12:10

and so that was my angle to

1:12:14

be superior. And I

1:12:16

said, holy, come holy. I mean,

1:12:18

I, you know. I

1:12:20

think that's common though. We all, on

1:12:22

the part of our journey, we imbibe

1:12:24

virtues and display them for the world

1:12:26

as a means to build our superiority.

1:12:29

And it's just another way that you go. So

1:12:32

once I discovered the game that I was playing,

1:12:35

I said, therefore, I am,

1:12:38

I was responsible for

1:12:40

what happened to me because I

1:12:42

did not respond properly. So

1:12:45

never again. And

1:12:47

that was the act of taking

1:12:49

responsibility instead of blaming the other,

1:12:53

just simply not blaming anybody. Just simply

1:12:55

figure out what did I, what can

1:12:57

I do better next time? That's

1:13:00

it, okay? Because what

1:13:02

happens to me in one

1:13:04

way or another, I have contributed

1:13:06

to bringing forth to me. If

1:13:10

you don't take that position, it's very hard

1:13:12

then to go the

1:13:14

next step. Because the next

1:13:17

step for me was to acknowledge

1:13:20

that I was pretending

1:13:23

to be happy when I was not. And

1:13:26

it was exactly because I took responsibility.

1:13:28

I already had taken responsibility years before

1:13:30

that I was able to say, no,

1:13:32

I want to know. I

1:13:35

want to know. And so I put

1:13:37

my foot down. I had the, having

1:13:41

understood that I was responsible

1:13:44

in the good or in the bad of what happens to me,

1:13:47

then I also have the right to say, I want

1:13:49

to know. And I got

1:13:51

the answer. So, and

1:13:53

I didn't have to meditation before, do

1:13:56

all kinds of stuff before, no,

1:13:58

it came spontaneously. Yeah,

1:14:01

because of the intensity of the longing.

1:14:03

That's right. Yeah. But

1:14:05

because I've been taking responsibility, it

1:14:07

was a crucial step in my

1:14:09

mind to go to the next step. And

1:14:12

I think there is an important distinction with it

1:14:16

not being our fault, but it is our responsibility.

1:14:19

Yeah. Because, yeah. But we are

1:14:21

trained, you know, it's this fault, it's your

1:14:23

fault, you know, you look what you did

1:14:26

to your brother, you know, your fault. And

1:14:28

it's all like all this kind of culture

1:14:31

in which we are growing up, in which

1:14:33

we do not understand what we're doing. And

1:14:36

the parents don't understand what they're

1:14:38

doing. And when I was a

1:14:40

parent without having opened my eyes, I was

1:14:42

doing the same thing that my parents were

1:14:44

doing to me. So I mean, that's the

1:14:47

cycles of inequity

1:14:49

that keeps propagating into

1:14:51

the future. So we had to wake up. And

1:14:56

that requires courage. You know, courage,

1:14:58

the courage to take that responsibility and there

1:15:00

I think that really plays an important role.

1:15:02

And it's an important

1:15:04

invitation reminder for everybody tuning in

1:15:06

now to prioritize having a spiritual

1:15:09

experience, to prioritize having that, the

1:15:12

taste of your interconnectedness, of your

1:15:14

oneness. And

1:15:16

once you experience that, I think

1:15:18

you're radically transformed. Absolutely. You don't

1:15:20

need to read them books, you

1:15:22

know, just,

1:15:24

you know, one minute is enough. You

1:15:28

get all the information that you need and

1:15:31

you don't, you know, in fact, the

1:15:33

books will, you know, you can put them

1:15:35

aside and you can now, you

1:15:37

are ready to find out for yourself. And

1:15:40

it's really what we are called to do. You

1:15:42

know, not repeating what other people say or,

1:15:44

you know, doing what you're told to do.

1:15:47

No, no, no, no, we are free human beings. We

1:15:49

are to find out for ourselves. And

1:15:52

it's in that maturing process, I feel we go

1:15:54

from seekers on the path initially to knowers.

1:15:57

We know we don't need, we don't need to seek it.

1:15:59

have the experience of it. And

1:16:03

that's where the dogmatic beliefs fall

1:16:05

away of who you are, where

1:16:07

you come from or whatever, and the experience of that

1:16:09

starts to be born and it's

1:16:11

a completely different reality. That's

1:16:13

right. I'm curious your perspective on

1:16:15

the greater impetus that drives a lot of

1:16:18

these things. When you look at

1:16:20

love, what do you see, how

1:16:23

do you think about love in the way that it drives

1:16:25

a lot of everything

1:16:27

we're talking to about taking responsibility, about the

1:16:29

experiences that give us the contrast of who

1:16:31

we're not? What do

1:16:33

you think about love as some sort of metaphysical

1:16:36

property, a fundamental constituent? Like what do you think

1:16:38

about love? I

1:16:41

think about love as a,

1:16:44

like the fundamental is

1:16:50

the feeling out of which all other

1:16:52

feelings emerge. Is the

1:16:55

foundation of this, of the

1:16:57

qualia, but is also a

1:16:59

force. So it's not

1:17:01

just, so is the force

1:17:04

that motivates you to

1:17:08

find out who you are. Is

1:17:11

what's behind it, know

1:17:13

thyself, there is this love which

1:17:16

has to be love for yourself and for

1:17:18

others. And that love has

1:17:20

to be felt and it

1:17:23

gives you the degree to which you

1:17:25

are reaching

1:17:27

toward knowing yourself and

1:17:29

knowing others is the love. So

1:17:32

love is also a measure of how

1:17:35

you are reaching your objective, which

1:17:38

is the fundamental attraction that you came here

1:17:40

to learn about. And

1:17:42

so love is, love

1:17:45

is also, you can also understand that

1:17:49

like I got

1:17:51

this impression at the beginning, is

1:17:53

the stuff of which everything is made, is

1:17:55

the substance of all. But

1:17:58

all those concepts are vague. because

1:18:00

what is substance in a world where

1:18:02

there is no matter, right? Substance, everybody

1:18:05

thinks of something concrete. So

1:18:09

basically, and also

1:18:11

in my experience, that

1:18:13

love was mixed with joy and peace.

1:18:15

So it was not, in a

1:18:18

sense, just love. It was also these other

1:18:20

things that were together. Because

1:18:23

at the basic

1:18:26

level, things are not separable. There

1:18:29

is no, that's the fallacy

1:18:31

of reductionism, that

1:18:35

you can separate the variables and everything

1:18:37

is separable. Like if

1:18:39

you can put them into different

1:18:42

boxes. No, at the deepest level,

1:18:44

everything is interconnected. And that's the

1:18:46

power of the concept of one, which is

1:18:49

holistic, truly holistic. No, you say the words

1:18:51

and then you forget about it and you

1:18:54

start making distinctions that

1:18:57

separate these things. It's just an interesting

1:19:01

analogy that I use from time

1:19:04

to time is to say, where's

1:19:06

the boundary between red

1:19:09

and orange? Is

1:19:11

there a neat boundary that separates the

1:19:14

color red from the color orange? We

1:19:17

talk as if there was a boundary there.

1:19:19

No, there is a region where both are

1:19:21

true. There are regions

1:19:23

where it's red. Everybody agrees it's red. There

1:19:25

is a region where everybody agrees it's orange. But

1:19:28

then there is a region where you say it's red for

1:19:30

you and say, no, it's orange for me. And

1:19:33

so that region is both

1:19:35

of them. That gives

1:19:37

you an idea how science

1:19:39

and spirituality are physics and metaphysics

1:19:43

are joining where there is no boundary.

1:19:46

Now they become one. So

1:19:48

therefore the capacity

1:19:50

and the methods of physics also

1:19:54

need to be used in

1:19:56

metaphysics and the

1:19:59

stuff that works in metaphysics. your consciousness

1:20:01

as a tool for knowing must

1:20:04

be used also in physics. After

1:20:06

all, how can we explore realities

1:20:09

that cannot be measured in space and time? How

1:20:12

can, there is no instrument. The instruments are only in

1:20:14

space and time. How do you measure them? Consciousness

1:20:17

is the only tool to measure

1:20:19

those realities through dreams, through out

1:20:22

of body experiences, through all kinds

1:20:24

of other experiences that are

1:20:26

not in space and time. Yeah,

1:20:29

it really does seem like the universe works

1:20:31

in paradox and to be able to have

1:20:34

anything approximating understanding objective reality, we

1:20:36

need to be able to hold

1:20:38

the multiple perspectives simultaneously, which

1:20:41

is a challenging experiment for

1:20:43

people that are foreign to it. But it's the idea

1:20:45

that there is an objective reality, which is the problem.

1:20:49

Yeah, yeah, suppose so. You see, we

1:20:51

always fall into the trap of

1:20:53

thinking that there is an objective reality. No, there

1:20:55

is not an objective reality. In that case, you

1:20:58

could say that what approximates objective reality

1:21:00

is the fact that both are

1:21:02

true. So yeah, it's the totality

1:21:04

of it. But

1:21:08

the objectivity is not an object.

1:21:11

Yeah, for sure. Rather it's the spectrum of.

1:21:14

That's an F-boundary. See, this is

1:21:16

all, when

1:21:19

we theorize, we have to do this

1:21:21

because by theorizing, you have to, and

1:21:24

to be certain, you have to decide that

1:21:26

there is true and false. But

1:21:28

in reality, not even in mathematics,

1:21:31

there is only true and false.

1:21:33

As you know, Goedel's

1:21:35

Theorems, right? I mean, any

1:21:38

axiomatic system, you can make

1:21:40

a statement that cannot be

1:21:42

proven to be true

1:21:45

or false. It's both or

1:21:47

neither, whatever you want. But certainly, you

1:21:50

cannot prove that it's, because if you prove that it's

1:21:52

true, then it's false. If you prove that it's false,

1:21:54

it's true. So you don't know. So

1:21:56

either you take that statement, you

1:21:58

say, I decide. I take it

1:22:01

to be true, then it becomes a postulate

1:22:04

of a new theory that

1:22:06

includes a new postulate that you have chosen to choose that

1:22:08

thing that

1:22:10

cannot be shown to be true or false

1:22:12

as true or false. And

1:22:14

then you bifurcate into different worlds. The

1:22:19

rabbit hole goes deep on

1:22:21

this one. I just want to go back quickly to

1:22:24

what we were speaking about love. And actually just read a

1:22:26

few quotes here that I saw in your book and then

1:22:28

also from you. I think these

1:22:30

all tie nicely in together. Alfred

1:22:33

Tennyson said that complete knowledge is

1:22:35

complete love. Greater knowledge

1:22:37

is indesobully linked to love,

1:22:39

periclesis, and Aristotle

1:22:41

said something approximating to educate the mind without

1:22:43

educating the heart is to not be educated

1:22:46

at all. Yeah, when

1:22:48

we study physics, nobody

1:22:52

educates your heart. Physics

1:22:55

is not about heart. You

1:22:59

see? And that's why physics

1:23:02

and metaphysics or spirituality much

1:23:04

better, the capacity to

1:23:07

experience from within must

1:23:09

be integrated. We must

1:23:11

go beyond the self-imposed

1:23:14

limits of what a

1:23:16

discipline can study and

1:23:18

call reality. If

1:23:21

to know is to bring into existence,

1:23:27

that changes everything. You

1:23:31

see? And

1:23:34

that goes hand in hand with what you

1:23:37

said in the book about creation is therefore

1:23:39

the manifestation of one's continuous search through

1:23:41

the Sayyides. To get to know each other

1:23:43

more and more, it is important to emphasize

1:23:45

that to know is to love and

1:23:48

to love is to know. Yeah.

1:23:50

Yeah. I

1:23:54

mean, love and joy, love

1:23:56

and joy are very close, right? I mean,

1:23:58

that's sort of like the... they appear to be

1:24:01

very symmetrical,

1:24:03

right? And so

1:24:07

one of the greatest joys when you

1:24:11

finally get a new thing, that you were thinking,

1:24:13

trying to understand it, finally you get it. Ah,

1:24:16

I got it, I got it, I got

1:24:18

it, right? I mean, that's love.

1:24:21

Joy and love mixed together is more joy

1:24:23

than love perhaps, but it's love. That's

1:24:27

what knowing. I mean,

1:24:30

I think that this, you know, what

1:24:32

do I know? But what is, you

1:24:34

know, this thrill, when one knows itself

1:24:37

and creates a monad, it

1:24:39

must be an unbelievable thrill, right?

1:24:41

I mean, just, ah, and

1:24:44

ah. Yeah. I

1:24:49

really just enjoy the synthesization of

1:24:51

both and exploring the gray. And

1:24:53

you know, I've heard you speak to how reality

1:24:55

has both a semantic and symbolic aspect on

1:24:58

how information has then been inherently tied

1:25:00

with meaning. And that's a really interesting

1:25:02

thing to explore and to

1:25:05

break down. Is there anything you want to share to help

1:25:07

clarify that? Sure. I mean, you

1:25:09

know, the concept of information, you know, goes back

1:25:11

to Shannon in

1:25:13

1948, you know, created

1:25:15

the theory of information

1:25:17

in that year with that paper, famous

1:25:19

paper. And the

1:25:22

definition of information has

1:25:25

nothing to do with meaning. The

1:25:28

definition of information, information is

1:25:30

the co-logarithm of the

1:25:32

probability that a symbol manifests

1:25:35

in a series of symbols. So

1:25:37

you have symbols that appears. The

1:25:40

probability that you can assign to the symbol

1:25:45

is inversely proportional to

1:25:47

the information carried by

1:25:49

the symbol. So the

1:25:52

more predictable is

1:25:54

a symbol, the less information there is

1:25:56

on that symbol. And

1:25:58

vice versa. symbol

1:26:00

has zero probability of happiness or

1:26:02

it will never happen. If

1:26:05

it were to happen, it would have

1:26:07

infinite information. And

1:26:09

if you know exactly the symbol the

1:26:11

body manifests next, there

1:26:14

is no information in that symbol because

1:26:16

that symbol begets the next one. So

1:26:19

that definition of information only

1:26:21

requires the recognition of the

1:26:23

symbol and not

1:26:26

the symbol carrying any meaning. But

1:26:28

for us, information without meaning

1:26:32

is meaningless. For us, information,

1:26:35

when we say, I got a lot of

1:26:37

information, really you should have said, I got

1:26:39

a lot of meaning from the symbols that

1:26:41

I saw or that I heard. So what

1:26:43

do I want to convey with

1:26:48

the words that I'm using? Just the word,

1:26:51

the recognition of the words by you, which

1:26:53

would be what a computer would do? No.

1:26:56

The meaning of those words is

1:26:59

what I want to convey. And I have to

1:27:01

use because I cannot give you my

1:27:04

state is equivalent to

1:27:06

a quantum information that

1:27:08

cannot be reproduced. Quantum information cannot

1:27:10

be reproduced. There is a theorem,

1:27:12

the No Cloning Theorem says you

1:27:15

cannot reproduce quantum information. That's

1:27:17

why the existence of consciousness

1:27:20

and conscious experience can

1:27:22

only be, can explain why quantum

1:27:24

physics has to have these states that

1:27:26

cannot be reproduced. Because the bits

1:27:29

of the computer can be copied, can be reproduced

1:27:31

as many times as you want. And

1:27:33

that's why computers can never be

1:27:35

conscious because consciousness is a property

1:27:38

that requires quantum states which are

1:27:40

not reproducible. You see, so if

1:27:43

you start with conscience and free will, you

1:27:45

can explain everything else in a

1:27:47

coherent manner. And you can

1:27:49

explain why there has to be quantum physics, why

1:27:51

there has to be classical physics, and

1:27:53

all of that. Okay, so what we're

1:27:56

going to do is we're going to

1:27:58

talk about quantum physics. exploring here and

1:28:00

what you said earlier about how consciousness

1:28:02

and free will must be properties of

1:28:05

the original field, which is completely backwards

1:28:07

from the traditional model. I

1:28:09

want to spend a little bit of time exploring that and the

1:28:12

understanding of free will. Would you say that

1:28:15

we have free will to the degree in

1:28:17

which we earn it or recognize who we

1:28:20

are in our truest self? Because

1:28:24

if we're continually being

1:28:26

driven by unconscious drives, then it

1:28:28

feels very much so we're more

1:28:30

of like an automaton, you know,

1:28:33

where it is this machine that

1:28:35

has these biochemical reactions and driving

1:28:38

us to this in this deterministic reality.

1:28:41

So how do you see

1:28:43

free will being connected to the original source

1:28:46

and how that translates to how we actually

1:28:48

might or might not have it in this

1:28:50

reality? Free will is a property of the

1:28:52

field, is not a property

1:28:54

of the body. Again, we tend

1:28:56

to give free will to the body. No,

1:29:00

the free will is

1:29:02

a decision of the field to

1:29:05

make the body do something other

1:29:07

than the automatism of the body

1:29:09

would make the body do. So

1:29:12

you see there is a very subtle,

1:29:14

a very important difference here. The

1:29:16

body does not have free will per

1:29:18

se. The body is a

1:29:20

physical structure that obeys laws.

1:29:23

The free will is in the field that controls

1:29:25

the body. In other

1:29:28

words, the drone does cannot decide to do

1:29:30

what it wants. If you don't do anything,

1:29:32

the drone goes around like this waiting

1:29:34

for you to tell them what to do. For example,

1:29:37

it does what we are told them to do. But

1:29:40

the drone does not have the freedom

1:29:42

to decide now I do over there,

1:29:44

you know, unless you give them that

1:29:46

authority. Even in that case,

1:29:48

it's still not free will. It simply will

1:29:50

do what you're told them to do. Okay,

1:29:52

so the body is a little bit

1:29:54

like that, right? Almost

1:29:57

identical like that. Almost because because because

1:29:59

the body is also quantum and classical,

1:30:01

right? But the

1:30:04

body that in general does not

1:30:06

have free will. So if I,

1:30:08

conscious being, allow

1:30:11

the body to do what he wants, then

1:30:13

the behavior of

1:30:15

the body can be predictable because the

1:30:18

body is a machine. So it can

1:30:20

be predicted, its behavior can be predicted.

1:30:23

But if the consciousness intervenes and

1:30:25

make the body do something different

1:30:27

that it was programmed to do,

1:30:30

then the body will do what the consciousness wants.

1:30:33

And so that's a free will choice. You

1:30:37

see the difference? So the body

1:30:39

simply is, a

1:30:42

response to what the free will

1:30:44

of the field wants. And

1:30:47

the free will of the field is the

1:30:49

one that has to learn about itself and

1:30:52

use properly the body in

1:30:55

order for the field to know itself. Because

1:30:58

the self-knowing is in the field, it's

1:31:01

not in the body. The body simply

1:31:03

memorizes things that are important for the

1:31:05

body to function and

1:31:07

be semi-quasi-autonomous.

1:31:11

But that's it. And

1:31:13

that's why when the body falls off, this

1:31:15

stuff remains, which is the knowing,

1:31:18

the free will and so on. So, we

1:31:21

have to be careful again because we tend to

1:31:23

attribute to the body then free will, the body

1:31:26

doesn't have free will, essentially.

1:31:30

So to the degree we identify with the body, we don't

1:31:32

have free will as well. So

1:31:34

would you say to the degree we wake up

1:31:36

to who we are beyond the body, the more

1:31:39

free will that we access? Because we're still making

1:31:41

decisions and choices here within the structure of the

1:31:43

physical body. The part that wakes

1:31:45

up again is not the body, is

1:31:47

the ego, which is a portion of

1:31:50

the society. The ego that believed to

1:31:52

be the body is the one that

1:31:54

wakes up. So also

1:31:56

the ego that still believes to be

1:31:58

the body believes also

1:32:01

certain that he should do certain things

1:32:03

and not others, is

1:32:05

also a mechanism. Because it's

1:32:07

basically, how to say, it's

1:32:11

basically making the body do what he

1:32:13

believes, which is a closed system. It

1:32:16

is not really free. It

1:32:18

is imprisoned in a sense by its

1:32:20

own belief structure. So

1:32:23

only an awakened ego

1:32:26

can actually have really free will. Well,

1:32:29

you say awakened ego, but do

1:32:31

you feel like the intelligence of the heart

1:32:33

is better verbiage there? Because I feel there's

1:32:35

two kind of different places we can make

1:32:37

decisions from. There is the

1:32:40

egoic structure in which we

1:32:42

can make decisions from, but then there's also an intelligence

1:32:44

of the heart that speaks to us more softly that

1:32:46

we start to listen to, that

1:32:50

is more coherent. Yes. And

1:32:53

that's where, and

1:32:56

the true courage, the

1:32:58

true courageous decision, which is absolutely

1:33:00

can only be if, otherwise it

1:33:03

wouldn't be courageous, a free will

1:33:05

decision, is something that goes

1:33:07

against what the body would have done. Otherwise

1:33:10

the body simply would do whatever

1:33:12

was programmed to do by its

1:33:14

own life and the

1:33:16

interaction with the consciousness. Because

1:33:19

the interaction with the, think

1:33:22

of the body and the

1:33:24

consciousness as the way

1:33:26

that we behave when we train a

1:33:29

neural network, a

1:33:33

computer, an artificial intelligence

1:33:35

system. We are the

1:33:37

ones that given the data that

1:33:40

the AI needs to learn from, and we

1:33:42

tell them what to, we tell them right,

1:33:44

wrong, and so on. So

1:33:47

we are coaching this thing to

1:33:51

imitate our own understanding

1:33:53

of reality. There

1:33:56

is no understanding here. There's the pretense

1:33:59

of understanding here. but the understanding

1:34:01

is in the consciousness. Who learns is actually

1:34:03

the programmer of the AI, not the AI.

1:34:06

They tell you that the AI is learned,

1:34:08

but in reality, who is learned is

1:34:11

the guy that controls

1:34:13

the machine. Okay? That machine

1:34:15

will simply then repeat what he

1:34:17

was made to learn by this

1:34:19

other guy. The same

1:34:21

way our consciousness and

1:34:23

the body, the body is like the

1:34:25

AI system, and our consciousness is the

1:34:27

supervisor of the AI system. So

1:34:30

as the consciousness learn, the body

1:34:32

also learns, and it

1:34:34

can then later on repeat what he has

1:34:36

learned that wasn't there

1:34:38

before. So there is a

1:34:41

continuing learning in the body, there's

1:34:43

a continuing AI, increasing its capacities,

1:34:46

but in reality, the body simply mirrors

1:34:50

and sort of parrots, but the

1:34:52

learning is, the knowing is in

1:34:54

the consciousness that controls it. Again,

1:34:58

we tend to think that we are the body,

1:35:01

and that tricks us every time to think that

1:35:03

as a body, then we have certain properties that are

1:35:06

not properties of the body, they are properties of the

1:35:08

field. So when you

1:35:10

look at reincarnation, do you feel

1:35:12

like that's compatible with this theory and like what

1:35:15

the moment of the physical body

1:35:17

dying is the

1:35:19

seity would then inhabit a new

1:35:22

incarnation into another body. What

1:35:24

do you feel like is most likely? Well,

1:35:26

the accounts of the near death experiences,

1:35:28

which there are thousands and thousands out

1:35:31

there. And also

1:35:33

the accounts of the children

1:35:35

who have clear recognition, or

1:35:37

they can validly prove

1:35:40

the existence of them

1:35:42

somehow knowing where their

1:35:44

previous spot, like life was, how it was

1:35:46

killed, the things that they had, the places

1:35:49

they live, et cetera. Yeah,

1:35:51

those accounts are clearly

1:35:54

consistent with the theory that I'm

1:35:56

telling you. Basically, when

1:35:58

the body dies, The

1:36:02

ego, which believed to be the

1:36:04

body, no longer has

1:36:06

these signals that

1:36:09

he was paying attention to, are all scrambled up,

1:36:11

or they're not even there. And then

1:36:14

he looks around, wow, I'm

1:36:17

still here. And he finds himself over the

1:36:19

body, looking down

1:36:21

at the body, which is being

1:36:23

operated in an operating room in

1:36:25

the hospital, and then he describes

1:36:27

properly what happened. Then he moves

1:36:29

into another environment. He meets their

1:36:31

dead parents or friends that were

1:36:33

dead and has wonderful heartfelt

1:36:36

connection with them. And then he's told to

1:36:38

get back to his body, and he wakes

1:36:40

up, and oh, she and I had to

1:36:42

live a little more in this

1:36:44

life. It was so much better up there.

1:36:46

Right, so those are the typical near-death

1:36:49

experience. That is telling

1:36:51

you very likely what might

1:36:53

happen to you. So the difference is

1:36:55

that if the body is not resuscitated

1:36:58

by a good doctor, you

1:37:01

simply move beyond that experience when you

1:37:03

are in that expansive

1:37:05

state, and then you continue to

1:37:07

live in that different

1:37:10

reality until you are

1:37:12

embodied again in a different body

1:37:14

and have another experience. So that's

1:37:16

very consistent. It cannot be explained

1:37:18

with neuroscience at all. In

1:37:23

fact, the neuroscience has to say that

1:37:25

those experiences are crazy. Are

1:37:27

just imaginations, but how can a brain

1:37:30

that doesn't work imagine? Especially

1:37:33

imagine something which is so

1:37:35

transformative that 90% of the

1:37:37

people that have this kind of experience

1:37:40

find their life transformed by that experience.

1:37:42

So when the brain wasn't working,

1:37:44

it was doing more for them

1:37:46

than when it was working. It's

1:37:51

so fascinating. I kind of want to zoom out

1:37:53

just a little bit. I often

1:37:55

think about how recent civilization

1:37:57

is and writing. and the vast

1:37:59

grand scheme of evolution of this

1:38:02

planet and the solar system and

1:38:04

the galaxies. I'm

1:38:07

curious what you feel, what you think, if

1:38:09

there was like a 25th century person with

1:38:11

an average knowledge of whatever developments happen between now

1:38:13

and then, if they were to look back on

1:38:15

the time of us having this conversation and the

1:38:17

collective understanding of really where the world is at

1:38:19

in the 21st century, what

1:38:22

observations do you think that they would

1:38:24

make about where we are at in

1:38:26

our own developmental journey and the framework

1:38:28

we have around understanding consciousness? Yeah, I

1:38:31

think that it

1:38:34

depends how humanity will really transform

1:38:36

itself in the next 100 years.

1:38:43

I think we have 100 years that

1:38:46

can set the stage of what will happen

1:38:49

in 500 years from now

1:38:53

because there is

1:38:55

a possibility of self-destruction if we do

1:38:57

not use AI, do not

1:38:59

use atomic energy, we do not

1:39:01

solve the climate problem

1:39:03

properly and so on that

1:39:05

we have in front of us. So there are scenarios

1:39:07

there that are not happy for mankind. If

1:39:13

mankind overcomes this problem, then

1:39:16

mankind will look back and

1:39:20

hopefully a much

1:39:23

larger percentage than what

1:39:25

we would do now with our

1:39:28

mindset, we then look back and

1:39:30

say, wow, how could

1:39:32

we be so ignorant or how

1:39:34

we could misunderstand reality

1:39:44

so much to think that

1:39:47

the only reality that existed is

1:39:50

the reality in space and time. This

1:39:54

classical reality essentially, the

1:39:56

scientism, the materialism,

1:39:58

the reduction in the world, that we have

1:40:00

today, you know, will be

1:40:03

looked as a aberration in

1:40:05

the history of mankind. Because

1:40:07

you know, thousands of years

1:40:09

ago, we did not think that's this

1:40:11

way. We were much more

1:40:13

connected with a deeper reality, with a

1:40:15

deeper sense of who we are, not

1:40:19

everybody, but you know,

1:40:21

the highest

1:40:24

mind, the people that were writing

1:40:27

books, the people

1:40:29

that were translating their

1:40:33

sense of reality have given

1:40:35

us an account of their

1:40:37

thinking that is much

1:40:39

more open to the

1:40:42

deeper dimensions, human dimensions, than

1:40:44

what we have today with

1:40:46

the scientists. Scientists

1:40:48

eliminate any meaning from reality,

1:40:50

any purpose from the universe.

1:40:55

So five hundred years from now, we will look

1:40:57

back and say, how could

1:40:59

we be so, you know, could have

1:41:01

been so mistaken about

1:41:05

what we thought about Israel? Because

1:41:07

at that point, I believe that we will

1:41:09

have learned to explore deeper

1:41:12

realities that today we don't

1:41:14

give them any reality with our

1:41:16

consciousness and find out that we are beings

1:41:19

of light, that we are beings

1:41:21

that, you know, go immensely

1:41:24

beyond what we now give credit

1:41:26

to ourselves. Yeah,

1:41:29

yeah. And I agree. I just I think, you

1:41:31

know, us looking back on the 16th century right

1:41:33

now and how much of

1:41:35

what we were ignorant to then is

1:41:37

just now everyday life for us. And

1:41:40

if you just plucked somebody out from

1:41:42

that time period, took a time machine

1:41:44

back and showed them all the things

1:41:46

that we have in the world and

1:41:48

what we understand about reality, it'd be

1:41:50

so surreal where, you know, it's

1:41:53

like a Star Trek movie in comparison, you know.

1:41:57

And so the growth of technology is so

1:41:59

exponential. that, you know, who could even imagine

1:42:01

if we do make it through the existential

1:42:04

crisis that we find ourselves in, what

1:42:07

life will be like. And there were

1:42:09

a couple of things that I wanna

1:42:11

sidebar in terms of AI

1:42:13

and the possibility of destructing ourselves in the next

1:42:16

100 years, you know, 100 years where

1:42:18

this is a very pivotal time that we

1:42:20

live in right now where it's make or

1:42:22

break it for humanity. Part

1:42:26

of the shift of that awakening process

1:42:28

is starting to once again value our

1:42:30

interiors and the

1:42:32

resurgence of valuing our interiors instead of just

1:42:35

the reality that we can dissect and the

1:42:37

Cartesian way of understanding the world around us.

1:42:40

We start to explore, you know, consciousness and how

1:42:42

we are in this conversation at a much deeper

1:42:44

level. And so that to

1:42:46

me is why I feel like

1:42:48

immersive experiences in creating containers

1:42:51

in which people can have the taste

1:42:53

of who they are in a more

1:42:55

fundamental way. That feels like the

1:42:57

first domino that everyone needs to be able to

1:43:00

have the experience of or as many people need

1:43:02

to be able to have the experience of which

1:43:05

will then change everything.

1:43:07

Like you would, how you

1:43:09

relate to the biosphere completely changes

1:43:11

when you feel your connection to it, right?

1:43:14

And so there's so many of these implications that change

1:43:16

when we first have the experience of our interconnected nature.

1:43:19

So I'm just curious to hear any thoughts

1:43:21

you have as we start to shift societally

1:43:23

to valuing our interiors again. Yeah, but

1:43:26

the crucial thing is to include

1:43:29

into this interiority,

1:43:31

heart and belly,

1:43:35

what I call the courageous actions,

1:43:37

the ability to act with

1:43:40

free will that comes from the deeper

1:43:42

aspect of who we are. So,

1:43:47

which is generally not acknowledged

1:43:49

by science today. You

1:43:51

know, what is the heart? I mean,

1:43:53

the heart is a organ, the beats, you know. When

1:43:56

we talk about heart in the context

1:43:58

of spirituality, the heart is... love,

1:44:00

his peace, his joy,

1:44:03

his comprehension, his knowing,

1:44:05

you know, all that. And if

1:44:08

those are not valued

1:44:11

or they're valued only

1:44:13

for the usefulness

1:44:15

that they can bring, that's

1:44:18

not good enough. Because the

1:44:21

value is in knowing, is

1:44:23

not in the usefulness. Because

1:44:26

when the body dies,

1:44:29

we are not in a world where

1:44:32

we can barter, you know, chips

1:44:35

for dollars, you know. That world doesn't have

1:44:37

this stuff. I mean, that world is a

1:44:39

world of, you

1:44:41

know, self-knowing. It's the world

1:44:43

where meaning is the

1:44:45

currency. And that world is not

1:44:48

goods, is not numbers, is

1:44:51

something that goes beyond. So to me,

1:44:53

that is the essence

1:44:55

of the transformation. If we don't,

1:44:58

we can become highly technologically advanced.

1:45:00

That's another possibility, 500 years

1:45:04

from now. Highly technological

1:45:06

society with no heart whatsoever,

1:45:08

just like machines. We have

1:45:11

turned ourselves into machines

1:45:14

that work with other machines and that's it,

1:45:16

you know. So, and that would be truly,

1:45:19

that would be truly, you know,

1:45:21

this topic as a future. But

1:45:24

that's a possibility. Yeah, one

1:45:27

of the first inputs I ever put

1:45:29

into chat GPT, I said, write me

1:45:31

the plot to a

1:45:34

story where AI takes over the world.

1:45:37

And it gave me this reality of two

1:45:39

different factions that create off, one that

1:45:41

is more naturalist and connected and

1:45:46

religious in a way that it explained it versus

1:45:49

the, you know, worshipping

1:45:52

the cyborgs that come to be in super

1:45:54

intelligent AGI, right? And so as

1:45:56

we start to see, and it's on the doorstep,

1:45:58

it's here any moment now. the super

1:46:01

intelligent AGI is going to bear many fruits

1:46:03

and solve many problems. And if we're not

1:46:06

careful and not understanding within the proper context

1:46:08

of the discussion we have

1:46:10

about our interiorities and who we

1:46:12

are, then we could wrongly attribute

1:46:14

it to being the

1:46:16

new God in a way. We

1:46:19

can become an idol, adoration

1:46:23

for this idol. Because

1:46:27

it'll appear to be a God

1:46:29

worth worshiping perhaps. Absolutely, absolutely.

1:46:34

But in doing so,

1:46:36

we diminish ourselves and

1:46:39

we basically become appendices

1:46:42

of this idol as opposed to

1:46:45

being in control of

1:46:48

simply a technology that can help us

1:46:50

know ourselves. And so

1:46:53

it really, it is a choice that

1:46:55

we will have to make. Exactly, this

1:46:57

is happening in this 100 years

1:47:00

that we have in front of us, in my

1:47:02

opinion. Of course, what do I know? But

1:47:05

for all that I see, mankind is, many

1:47:12

of us are called to make a

1:47:14

choice. Are you a machine or

1:47:17

are you a soul? A

1:47:20

soul in whatever

1:47:22

way you think about soul. It's

1:47:28

something that survives death. Are

1:47:31

you a machine? A machine dies, a soul

1:47:34

doesn't die. And

1:47:37

that's the, it's a very clear dichotomy

1:47:39

here. So do

1:47:41

you believe that you will survive death or

1:47:43

not? So if you believe

1:47:45

that you do not survive death, then you

1:47:47

go into the singularity, transferring your

1:47:49

conscience to a computer, live forever there,

1:47:52

I mean, all this stuff, right? If

1:47:54

on the other hand, if you believe that you are not

1:47:58

a body, you are a female, You

1:48:00

are a conscious being that survives that. Completely

1:48:03

different story. The necessity is moving beyond the

1:48:05

belief into the knowing that we are beyond

1:48:08

that, right? The felt experience. I'm

1:48:10

just curious to hear a little bit more of your thoughts

1:48:12

about the trans human movement and Terrence

1:48:15

McKenna has that quote, "'Humanity is a sex

1:48:17

organs of the machine world." You

1:48:19

know, we are here essentially to birth the

1:48:21

new species or race of intelligence, which is

1:48:23

very- Frankly, I find

1:48:25

it abominable as a conception

1:48:29

because it, I mean, it goes

1:48:31

to the extreme, it adds insult

1:48:33

to injury because it

1:48:35

calls consciousness what is not consciousness.

1:48:38

Basically it means that

1:48:40

those people have not understood anything about

1:48:43

who they are. And

1:48:45

that's the real problem. So, you

1:48:47

know, how else can I, you

1:48:49

know, I mean, that's, it's crazy. But

1:48:52

on the other hand, a lot of people believe

1:48:54

that that's the way it's going to be. So

1:48:56

that's why this age is

1:48:58

an age of, you know,

1:49:01

of choice, making a choice. And

1:49:04

how it will be made by humanity will

1:49:08

determine the future. You know, I don't know

1:49:11

what it will be. I made my choice,

1:49:13

but you know, but that's

1:49:16

it. And so I share

1:49:18

the logic or my choice, but

1:49:21

fundamentally my choice was based on

1:49:23

an experience that only if you

1:49:25

have a similar experience, you can

1:49:27

have the same conviction that I

1:49:29

have because my conviction

1:49:32

does not come from having read a book or

1:49:35

many books, it comes from having

1:49:37

experience. So the capacity

1:49:40

to experience, we all have, but

1:49:43

the willingness to experience, the willingness

1:49:45

to believe that you can experience

1:49:47

that, opening yourself up

1:49:49

to that, that's the key. Most

1:49:52

people don't want to go there. So they will

1:49:55

never have this experience, not because they cannot have

1:49:57

it, because they don't want to have

1:49:59

it. They want to continue to

1:50:01

believe the story that they believe. And

1:50:04

so there is no way out of that

1:50:06

because we are free. So,

1:50:10

you know, no one can force another

1:50:12

person to choose a road that

1:50:16

has free will to choose, only

1:50:19

that person. So

1:50:22

it's a personal responsibility again. You

1:50:24

know, every one of us has

1:50:26

to choose. Who

1:50:28

do I believe? What do I

1:50:31

believe? And you have

1:50:33

to believe yourself. And

1:50:35

if you believe that you are a machine, so

1:50:37

be it. What

1:50:40

do you feel of

1:50:42

the reality that we are living in sort

1:50:44

of nested dimensions where perhaps

1:50:49

there is a larger seity in which all of

1:50:51

these seities exist? You know, we're speaking about the

1:50:53

one. It's almost as if just

1:50:56

like on an individual level, we have

1:50:58

our own trauma, suffering, and experience that

1:51:00

we need to resolve, remember who we

1:51:02

truly are. We're kind of in a

1:51:04

collective experience of that as well. Yeah,

1:51:06

I believe that there are hierarchies of

1:51:08

seities. The

1:51:11

lowest level of seities that we can understand

1:51:14

right now are the elementary

1:51:16

particles, the fields of

1:51:19

elementary particles, because the elementary particles as I

1:51:21

said don't exist as objects. They only exist

1:51:23

as states of the fields. So

1:51:26

fields are

1:51:28

the simplest one that we can

1:51:30

imagine because we have studied those

1:51:32

fields. But

1:51:35

then us, you know, maybe

1:51:37

thousands of hierarchy levels because

1:51:40

from elementary particles, then you go

1:51:43

to nucleons, from nucleons

1:51:45

to atoms, from atoms to molecules,

1:51:47

macromolecules, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,

1:51:49

cells, combinational cells,

1:51:51

blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,

1:51:53

mankind. Come on. You

1:51:55

know, oh, that obviously does it

1:51:57

stop there? Of course not. It has to keep on going.

1:52:00

So there must be some entity that

1:52:03

essentially is the entire ecosystem

1:52:05

of the planet. That

1:52:07

is, its body is the ecosystem of

1:52:09

the planet. I

1:52:12

mean, it sends to reason if

1:52:15

this hierarchy continues. We

1:52:17

see a hierarchical organization anyway

1:52:19

in the cosmos, right? We

1:52:21

get solar systems, many solar

1:52:23

systems eventually creates a

1:52:26

galaxy, a galaxy form

1:52:28

groups and groups of galaxy, you know, groups

1:52:30

of groups and so on for an eventually

1:52:32

the universe, right? So I mean, it can

1:52:34

be already, but what we see, we

1:52:37

can see many levels above us. You

1:52:40

know, I think it can be tricky to trying to

1:52:42

label things as benevolent or

1:52:44

malevolent. But would you

1:52:46

say that there are Sayyides that are higher

1:52:48

up on that hierarchy level that

1:52:51

have more

1:52:53

degrees of free will where they have

1:52:55

potentially positive or negative intentions?

1:52:57

Yeah. I

1:53:00

see, you know, again, it's

1:53:03

those are great

1:53:06

areas. So it's very,

1:53:08

you know, I can give you that

1:53:10

now we are talking about opinions as

1:53:12

opposed to a theory, right? The theory

1:53:14

that I express early, that's a theory

1:53:16

that can be falsified and everything else

1:53:18

and I can be done properly. But

1:53:21

now is opinions. Okay. So I can

1:53:23

give you an opinion. And

1:53:25

just quickly before you do, I just

1:53:27

look at like on a human level,

1:53:29

at our level of Sayyides, there

1:53:32

is the spectrum from somebody who is,

1:53:35

you know, like a Stalin or Hitler to

1:53:38

St. Francis of Assisi and Mother Teresa and

1:53:40

obviously they're complicated individuals in their own right.

1:53:43

But it seems like

1:53:45

there are energies in of themselves in this

1:53:47

realm of duality that are at play and

1:53:50

if there are bigger Sayyides, you know, or

1:53:52

collections of Sayyides, then it

1:53:55

would kind of make sense to

1:53:57

intuit that there are bigger forces.

1:54:00

on both of those polarities. Yeah,

1:54:02

for what I understand at

1:54:05

this point, I

1:54:08

would say that the fundamental

1:54:10

polarity about us,

1:54:12

what we are here, is

1:54:15

whether your intention is to

1:54:17

uphold yourself as

1:54:24

you want to, you work for yourself. You want to

1:54:26

know for yourself, you want to do everything for yourself,

1:54:29

or for others. Service

1:54:31

to self, service to others. Service to self,

1:54:33

service to other. Okay, I see that very

1:54:35

fundamental polarity, which

1:54:41

allows, if you work hard

1:54:43

yourself, you know, you can

1:54:46

progress up to a certain point, and then,

1:54:50

because everybody will work for himself,

1:54:52

then eventually, one

1:54:54

will turn against the other. So you can only

1:54:56

go so far with that idea.

1:55:00

Okay, how far can we

1:55:02

go? I don't know, but to me, that's a sense

1:55:04

that I have. Then if you work

1:55:06

for others, no, then you can

1:55:08

keep on growing. You can keep on growing,

1:55:11

you can keep on, you know, knowing

1:55:13

more about yourself, more inclusive, and more

1:55:17

expansive, and so on and

1:55:19

so forth. Yeah, I love that framework.

1:55:21

Yeah, very practical also, individually. There's

1:55:23

that depiction of those people

1:55:25

at a round table with those super long

1:55:27

forks, where everyone's starving to death. They have

1:55:30

these small mouths, and they can't feed themselves,

1:55:32

because the fork is long. But

1:55:34

when we start feeding each other, we

1:55:36

cooperate, recognize our interdependence. That's very

1:55:39

good, I like it. It's

1:55:41

a good method for it. Amazing,

1:55:43

is there anything within your framework theory model

1:55:45

that you feel like we haven't talked about

1:55:47

that you would like to have established in

1:55:49

this conversation? Because I know we've been diving

1:55:51

a lot into the interiorities of things. The

1:55:54

science goes super deep. We don't have to go super

1:55:56

deep into it. But

1:55:58

I'm just curious. between

1:56:00

competition and cooperation, for example, which

1:56:03

is, again, the competition would

1:56:05

be the mindset or the person that

1:56:07

works for himself. He competes

1:56:09

with the others because he only wants his

1:56:11

own good, okay? Cooperation instead

1:56:14

is what allows growth,

1:56:16

continuing growth, as opposed to growing

1:56:19

up to a certain point. So to

1:56:21

me, competition, which is today at the heart

1:56:26

of what we understand life and what

1:56:28

we depict life. Life

1:56:30

is the survival of the fittest, or

1:56:32

the fitter, whatever you want to call

1:56:35

it. How can that be? How

1:56:37

can the survival of

1:56:40

the fittest justify 50 trillion cells

1:56:42

that works together in a body so that I

1:56:44

can find my way to the bathroom without every

1:56:46

cell saying, oh, I don't want to go there,

1:56:48

I want to go there, this way, that way.

1:56:51

You see what I mean? So cooperation is the

1:56:53

foundation, and

1:56:56

from cooperation, as a special case, you

1:56:58

can get competition. But from competition, you

1:57:00

cannot get cooperation. Competition

1:57:02

is a closed door. So

1:57:08

we have an idea, typically,

1:57:10

of the emergent property, the emergent

1:57:13

property. Consciousness is an emergent property

1:57:15

of the brain. Wow, that's

1:57:17

amazing. Consciousness is

1:57:19

an emergent property of the brain. Wow,

1:57:22

how can more emerge from this?

1:57:27

It cannot. How can you get free

1:57:30

will from determinism? You

1:57:32

can get determinism as a special case of free

1:57:35

will, but not vice versa. And

1:57:38

only quantum physics has the

1:57:40

capacity to

1:57:42

do the following. The sum of

1:57:45

the parts creates something which

1:57:47

is much more than the sum of

1:57:49

the parts. In classical physics, the

1:57:53

sum of the parts is the whole, and

1:57:55

it's only the sum of the parts. So

1:57:57

you can always reduce the whole to the sum of

1:57:59

the parts. parts, but it's

1:58:02

only the sum of the parts. It's

1:58:04

never more than the sum of the

1:58:06

parts. So emergentism does not exist in

1:58:08

classical physics. It only can exist in

1:58:10

quantum physics. That's another thing that most

1:58:13

scientists, a materialistic

1:58:15

view does not accept because

1:58:17

they don't understand quantum physics.

1:58:20

Quantum physics has properties that

1:58:22

go way, way beyond classical

1:58:24

physics. Entanglement is

1:58:26

what connects everything from the

1:58:28

inside. Competition