직관적인 여정: 의식과 존재에 대한 탐구

### 수학과 직관을 통해 현실의 깊이를 발견하기
* 🃏 인터뷰 대상자는 자신을 **현대판 광대**라고 생각하며, 사람들을 습관적인 사고방식에서 벗어나 **현재의 순간**으로 이끄는 것을 목표로 합니다.
* 🧠 이 관점으로의 여정은 **수학에서 0의 근본적인 특성에 대한 깊은 깨달음**에서 시작되어 **모든 숫자의 상호 연결성에 대한 통찰력**으로 이어졌습니다.
* 🌌 이러한 깨달음은 **"무"라는 렌즈**를 통해 과학적, 종교적, 철학적 개념을 연결하여 우주에 대한 더 넓은 이해를 포괄하는 것으로 확장되었습니다.
* 🧙 인터뷰 대상자는 **직관이 이성적 사고에 선행하고 보완하는 더 높은 형태의 지능**이라고 설명하며 업무에서 직관의 중요성을 강조합니다.
* 🕊 그들은 **사랑과 만연함이 신의 본질에 가장 가까운 인간의 경험**이며, 사랑은 이 만연함을 통합하는 힘으로 작용한다고 제안합니다.
* 🎭 이성적 사고와 직관적 사고의 균형을 맞추는 것은 최적의 성능을 얻기 위해 **악기를 조율하는 것**과 마찬가지로 영적 성장에 매우 중요합니다.
* 🎲 인터뷰 대상자의 창의적 추구에는 종종 사소해 보이거나 '바보 같은' 문제를 탐구하는 것이 포함되는데, 이 과정에서 **예기치 않게 현실의 본질에 대한 심오한 통찰력**이 드러날 수 있습니다.
* 🕵 그들은 신성의 진정한 본질은 인간의 언어와 수학적 설명을 초월한다고 말하며, **결정적인 '신 방정식'을 추구하지 말라**고 경고합니다.

### 정체성, 의식, 영적 성장에 대한 철학적 대화
* 🌌 이 대화는 **모든 존재의 상호 연결성, 현재를 살아가는 것의 중요성, 인간 진화의 순환적 특성**에 대해 탐구합니다.
* 🌱 연사들은 정체성 위기의 개념과 그것이 어떻게 사회적 도전으로 이어질 수 있는지 논의하며 **분열보다 화합과 사랑의 필요성**을 강조합니다.
* 🧘 모든 개인과 우주의 상호 연결된 특성을 강조하는 **'퍼베이시브'라는 개념**을 탐구합니다.
* 💬 연사들은 사고와 의식을 형성하는 데 있어 **언어, 특히 산스크리트어의 힘**에 대해 이야기합니다.
* 🌞 이들은 의식의 영원성을 설명하기 위해 **웅덩이에 반사된 변하지 않는 빛**과 같은 비유를 사용하여 의식의 영원한 본질에 대해 이야기합니다.
* 🧠 모든 신념 체계의 궁극적인 목표인 '더 나은 사람'이 되는 데 중점을 두고 **분별력과 영적 성장의 중요성**을 강조합니다.
* 📜 대화는 도덕경의 한 구절로 마무리되며, **삶의 흐름에 순응할 때 얻을 수 있는 평화와 안정**을 강조합니다.
* 🙏 연사들은 서로와 청중에게 감사와 사랑을 표현하며 **평화와 화합의 메시지**로 마무리합니다.

진리를 추구하는 사람은 분별력을 통해 꽃을 피우고, 무상한 것 속에서 영원한 것을 발견합니다.

foreign [Music] so yeah, let's just get right into this. How would you describe what it is exactly that you do online, and what's the inspiration behind your creation? I'm always brought to the first tarot card, which is the wizard or the magician, or even before that, but if they had the Fool on top of the Tarot deck. And I like the archetype for the fool because the Fool's job is to transform through provocation. And really, at the heart of my being, I just want to grab people's shoulders and just shake them, you know? And so through my videos, I like to do that. I like that, yeah. The archetype of the jester, he was the only one that could make fun of the King, right, to a certain extent, exactly. So what is it that you're trying to shake up in people, you know? Is there a certain message or a direction that you're trying to get people attuned to? Like, what is it about the idea of the fool? What is the Foolery that you uh

that you involve yourself with and why particularly it is the engaging of a deep intense experience of the present moment. For so many of us wander mindlessly in the past and the future that it's almost lonely being in the present because no one else is here with you. So you want to get them to the same spot so everyone can enjoy this conscious perspective. There it is, it's getting people on the inside of the joke with you. Sure, yeah, I like that. Where does this all come from for you? The Buddha once said that who a monk who asked them the same question and I quite like this answer. He said imagine you were walking in a forest and out of nowhere an arrow came from the bushes and strikes you in the thigh. Would you a go and inspect the bushes figuring out where you were struck from and who pulled the bow string or would you rush immediately to a nearby village so your wound could be treated? You know only the ignorant would go into the bushes to try to find the source of

the arrow so in the similar way when one is Faith with this life which we are miraculously brought into there is no point in searching for the source of all this pain suffering or even joy and pleasure for all sensual objects are supposed to bring us to the end goal and not the source hmm I don't know what to say yeah that's a good answer yeah I mean hey you leaving me speechless there's something about the way you speak man it's like uh it's quite meditative it's quite uh almost hypnotic in a way yeah I don't know I just I applaud you for that thank you so um yeah I mean because I usually you know my my things usually go on like all right so like what was your journey about how did you get to this do you recommend anything I don't know that was that was a good that was a good synopsis to really just end it right there it's just like wow okay well I can tell you this of course from an absolute perspective

There is no origin to anyone's journey when it comes to this, but we can point out special moments where you know that opening was very directly in our awareness. One very important one for me, which you and your viewers might be interested in, is a bizarre relationship I have with mathematics. Because for a huge portion of this life, this mind was so skeptical about everything. I had absolutely no interest in anything which was not scientific, only that which had reasoning for. But the funny thing about logic and mathematics is that if you go deep enough within it, at the very bottom, it almost deconstructs itself, and you fall through the pit because there truly is no foundation, despite most rationalists' belief that it does. For me, I was only interested in math because math is the language of physics, and I wanted to know how the universe worked. That's why I went to college. But then it struck me that no matter what possible laws of physics we discover, all of them would be encoded in mathematics.

so mathematics is more fundamental than physics then since it has the power to encode more possible truths. But you can play that game again and ask what are the rules for mathematics and what encodes those rules or other possible rules and you get to different levels of logic until you get to meta logic and then it gets messy. But what you find is that you can always keep asking the question what are the rules of this model and what syntax holds the keys to all possible models and you find that it is truly bottomless. The pet through physics, Math, logic, and meta logic. So I will never forget that in my dorm room one day a very peculiar event occurred where it had really directly dawned on me that at the heart of all science was a deep beautiful Pit of nothingness but in the most profound way such that this nothingness was not an absence but a presence. Its bottomlessness, its emptiness, and its pervasiveness was precisely the source for all possibilities that sprung from this void and through some miraculous

connection. I remembered that the Buddha chose Nirvana as a word to mean nothingness, and Lao Tzu chose Tao to mean a word that cannot be spoken of. And in the Hebrew of the Torah, the first creation of God was the formlessness. And in Hinduism, the god Shiva is a word that means nothing. So, from that moment, a spider web of tautologies rippled through my mind, and I was able to connect this nothingness to the heart of not just science but all religion. And so, I could say if I wanted that that was a pivotal moment, and it truly was, but it all has always been that moment. Yeah, it's interesting when you put it that way. The totality of nothingness brought you to see the connection in everything, everything. The grand duality of all brought you to the ultimate sense of non-duality. It's quite interesting. Was there a specific equation that you were working with, like a set of proofs, or just like you were just sitting in your bed meditating? You know, what was your Bodhi Tree moment?

was there like something happening? Is there some kind of phenomena? Yeah, there was actually. I was staring at my notebook, I think, and it was something like an equation, but at the level of logic, the equation symbol isn't invented yet, so it is more so just a logic expression. Wow. But in particular, there is this very strange idea that's very hard to get across, but you can pick up upon it by playing the game of asking why whenever you're faced with a number. Because this whole journey was started from this question. I learned through some birdie that mathematics was built upon nine axioms. They're called the zfc or zermello Franco plus choice axioms. And what they are specifically are unimportant, but what is important is the fact that they're axioms. And I was very curious, why not? Why is it that all of the truths that we have in Science and Mathematics come from these nine? Why not eight? Why not ten? What's so special about nine? And of course, the longer you think about

it the more you realize well there really isn't anything that special about nine when it comes to any other number. So, this brought me to the question: what number wouldn't be arbitrary? Well, eight seems just as arbitrary. Ten seems just as arbitrary. Any bigger number than nine seems just as arbitrary. Smaller numbers seem less arbitrary. You know, if it was just the three, then you know we could imagine that there's some Trinity of sorts or two. But even then, I would still feel compelled to ask Y2. I thought one-one would be pretty non-arbitrary if it was one. That seems nice. But then we have a different question to ask: why that one? Sure, it makes sense that it's just one because that's a very, very simple number. But why that one? So, there still is a level of arbitrariness when it comes to the number one. And that's when zero entered my mind: the almost impossible question. What if it were zero, forgetting what that even means to make zero assumptions? What if there were zero? Well, that I felt at the

heart of my being, which is only expressed in pure intuition, is the least arbitrary number. None. Um. Ah. Yeah. Oh, that makes sense. I like that. And that was the dawning. That was the revelation. Precisely. Wow, so simple. Yeah, because then in the way that you described it, it almost makes it seem that every number other than zero is the same number, right? Because if it's all equally arbitrary in a way, then it's all. It's either. It's either zero or it's something. It's either nothing or something. And everything that is something, no matter what it is, whether it's one, two, three, four, one million, it's the same thing, even though it may appear different as a different symbol. It's not. It's the same thing. It's not zero. Wow, exactly. And that gets even more. I like directly. I love it too. Wow. In set theory, you'll learn that every number is constructed by what are called pure sets. And a pure set is nothing but the empty set, but in different combinations with itself. So in

a very literal way in mathematics. All numbers are just zero compounded with itself in different combinations. Oof, that's taking it a step further. Wow, so that's just to say you can prove that everything is nothing but nothing. That's really good, but that's just for fun. Yeah, yeah, that's just for kicks, but that's good. I've never really thought of it like that, but it's so simple. That's such a simple equation right there. I don't even know if you call it an equation. Identity would be nice. Identity, I like that a lot, man. I also, um, you said something about your intuitive sense brought you to that. Like, there was something where your intuition gave you that answer. I find that our intuitive sense is like a higher intelligence in a way. I don't even know if it's higher or lower. It's just different. It's different than that rationale of the one plus one equals two. Like, the intuition somehow transcends the rational mind, you know what I mean? Certainly, yeah, yeah, and that's it is necessarily

impossible to speak about it because our speech is relying on the rational mind. Yeah, um, the rational, I'm sorry, the intuitive mind is almost like before the rational mind. It's not before, it's more so just like a, yeah, it's hard to explain, man. Yeah, symbolically above, yeah, symbolically above like a different layer to, uh, to the intelligence. Hmm, it's powerful, the higher self, some may say, you know, or the SAT Guru. But it's, I feel it, man, I feel it. It's the, uh, it's like a higher guidance, and it doesn't negate the rationale either. That's the thing. I feel like no, once we embrace the intuition, it almost helps their action out. Absolutely. They work, they coincide with each other. The way I understand the difference between how to tell between rationality and intuitiveness is that if you pay very close attention to logic and rationalizing, you'll notice that it is never what brings you to some place new. It is always what you do retroactively to realize how you got where you are.

but it's the intuition which actually brings you to new places. For instance, of course, from my background, I'm going to have a lot of math-related examples, but as any mathematician will tell you, when you're proving something, at some point, you just stumble upon the answer, and then you use logic to trace your steps how you got there. But that stumbling is somehow preceding that logic, and that stumbling is the intuition. Hmm, yeah, it's so true. Do you feel as though the path per se is almost coming into contact with that intuitive guidance? Like the, you know, the reason that we do meditation, self-inquiry, yoga, Qigong, whatever it is, he, you know, insert whatever practice is here, it's the strengthening that connection with that intuitive guidance that we have. Absolutely, yeah, couldn't have said it better myself. Yeah, and it's as simple as that. Do you feel as though there is an orientation in that guidance toward maybe love or compassion or maybe selflessness? You know, it's almost like a surrender to a higher force because it's like

in that intuition, it's almost like you let the hands off the steering wheel, or at least it seems like you let the hands off the steering wheel a little bit, and you kind of let the guidance flow through you, you could say so, right? Would you say there is a certain kind of direction in that flow? Well, all of the things you've named, love and understanding and something about the self, all of these things are intuition in another name for all of these things. Well, let's play the example of love. You will find, well actually before we start that, the definition between two things being different or not is this: if they can be experienced without each other, then they are separate. So, for example, this peanut butter jar and this knife here is peanut butter jar without knife. Here is knife without peanut butter jar. Therefore, they are separate. Love is never there without understanding. Where there is love for something, there is understanding, and where there is understanding, there is love. The more we love something, the more we understand it, and the more we understand

something. The more we love it, so because of this, it fails the proof of different things. It fails being different love and understanding. They are two flavors of the same underlying thing, and we could play the same game with self-surrender, self-expression, with intuition. These are all different flavors of the same underlying thing that goes by many names but yet has no name itself. And absolutely, it requires a sort of relinquishing of our sense of control to get into the flow of because it is naturally there. It is not something that one has to acquire through practice. It's not a skill to be intuitive. The only skill is letting go of the self-control to rest within that intuitiveness that is already there. Yeah, yeah, well said, wow. And then would you say from that is a little less inertia out of life? You know, life becomes the suffering. You know, it's still there, but just maybe it appears in a different light. Yeah, it almost feels you feel lighter, so not as much inertia. Precisely, however, something can be said about

inertia in a positive sense, which is that you do want to get to that state where you easily flow down that River like a feather. But a feather can also be swept away by the wind, and you discard the path of the river just like that. So, a certain amount of balance is necessary between the inertia of a boat, which will easily go down a stream but not be swept away off the stream by a wind. So, a certain level of worldliness and ego is still required, and of course, this is similar to what the Buddha said about the middle way. You know, when you're playing an instrument, you don't want it so loose that when you flick it, it's just all rubbery and not making any sound. And you don't want the strings so taut that when you flick it, it breaks immediately. So, one should perform spiritual austerity in order to lighten the mind, but don't make it so light that you break it or get blown away by the wind. Yeah, that's good. It's all about balance.

I guess another way to say it is like don't get sucked too much into the egotistical thinking, but also don't get too, I guess, don't get too lofty, don't get too Godly, yeah, because then that would just lead to an imbalance on either pull, on either Duality, one could say. So yeah, it's like still, it's like remain humble in the face of God, but also remain empowered as an expression of God. I guess another way, my interpretation of saying, yeah, it's good stuff. We've covered a lot of ground in 20 minutes. Yeah, this is good. Oh man, I don't even know what to say. I don't even know what to say, to be honest, man. Yeah, hey, thanks for coming on here and doing this. I really appreciate it. Oh, I'm happy to. What do you like? What are your hobbies? You know, I know, take it down a notch here. Like, what do you do during the day? Are you a writer? Because you're quite poetic. Not really, no. Sometimes I like to write.

poems for my girlfriend. If you want to count that, but that's beautiful. Thank you. Um, and when I was younger, I used to write a lot of short stories. But my day-to-day life is usually not filled with writing. My day-to-day life is, you know, it's very strange. I would never consider myself a programmer, but on average, if you were to make a bet what I'm doing, you'd make a lot of money betting programming. Um, and that's because, uh, there's a lot of things that I love researching in mathematics that require programming to illustrate or visualize or compute. And so I don't program for the sake of programming necessarily, but for the sake of aiding my research. But then again, I don't do math for the sake of research necessarily either, but for the sake of expressing myself. Yeah, so what's a good chunk is that you're creating like some kind of program. I got you know what's in the works. So much variety. No, not confidential at all. Just so, so

almost silly little program. Some of them I spend weeks on, so silly might be the not the best adjective, but um, sometimes I really get obsessed with um. I'll tell you one uh, just a few days ago uh, I was inspired by this mathematician John Conway, who a lot of people know as the inventor of uh, the game of life, that cellular automaton that often shows up in people's YouTube recommendations um, but he was a great mathematician and a big inspiration to me, and he would love to pick little stupid problems, you know. He was a theoretical mathematician who could solve problems in higher dimensions and visualize objects existing in other universes, you know. He was no joke, but he'd pick a children's game and spend months analyzing the game until he discovered Something Beautiful about it. The most famous example is a game called hackenbush, where it's a game about drawing lines on a chalkboard and erasing them, where you take turns and whoever has a line left standing wins. And he analyzed this game for months.

maybe years, and in it, he discovered that every game, every possible game in hackenbush, represented a number. A blank chalkboard represented the number zero, and one line on the right represented one, and one line on the left represented negative one. And he found a duality between every number and every game in this children's plaything. And so, he started wondering if other numbers were in there. And it's clearly negative numbers and positive numbers, but he discovered fractions, and Pi was in there, and he found all the numbers were in there. But actually, there were even more numbers being represented by this game than in our current theory of numbers. So hidden within a children's game was a whole universe of numbers beyond the numbers we were familiar with. And he called them The Surreal numbers because they were surreal. They behaved so more transcendental than any other number we were familiar with before. And so, it's that type of problem that I love, is you start with something just for fun, and you end up with something profound out of nowhere. And I find the universe

is very cheeky like that. It tends to hide the deepest truths in the places where you'd need the most open heart to reach, like the words of a child or the game of a child. Yeah. Hmm. You couldn't have a big ego and start studying a children's game, and so you'd never understand the huge World Of The Surreal numbers without that childlike heart. Hmm. Wow. That's what I said. Yeah. God is a bit of a comedian in that way, and why shouldn't he move? Yeah. It's like putting little Easter eggs in our reality. Yeah. Do you think we'll ever, uh, this is a dumb question, but I'm gonna ask it anyway. Do you think we'll ever be able to prove, uh, I was gonna say God with math, but maybe just like a greater reality with mathematics. And I think to a certain extent we have in terms of like quantum physics, right? But do you ever think there's going to be like a god equation, maybe similar to what we spoke about before with the zero and one thing?

The Sounds beyond that [Music]. When one speaks about God, writes about God, or invokes God in a symbol, what we are doing is bringing God down to a material level rather than bringing a symbol up to a divine level. So, there is this very technical notion of God in ancient spirituality, particularly found in the Vedas and Upanishads, which denotes a difference between foreign and the absolute reality when endowed with qualities, properties, and conditions. When we speak about God being a giver of love and light, or being a preserver, or a creator, or a destroyer, all of these things are attributes. And when we take a very close look at all attributes, even they are impermanent. So, when we consider God to be under these notions of having attributes, then we are only considering an impermanent aspect of God, the Nirguna Brahman, the absolute reality which is beyond attributes, which cannot even be said to be God, that cannot be spoken about, that cannot be put into an equation, because equations can only describe quantities and properties and attributes, whereas

this absolute reality, which precedes time, space, and causality, how could it have any attribute for it to change? As long as there is a variable in that equation, then that means it is subject to change. But as long as there is even a number in that equation, then that means it is subject to quantity. And as long as there is even an equality symbol or any other relation symbol within this expression, then that means we are bringing together some duality. So, the true non-dual absolute reality can never be spoken about vacuously by any equation, by any theory, by any model of the mind. All of these things we know, and this is a powerful form of logic to know this without any antecedents. The fact that no, we will never make an equation, and that's the most beautiful thing. Yeah, yeah, you're right. I wouldn't want to ever have a like this is it, like this isn't Revival, you know, like here you go, is all the answers. I like the mystery. I like the uncomfortable aspect of life.

that's the beauty of God. One could say is that we'll never figure out God. Beauty, that's what makes God God. Yeah, exactly. Uh, would you say the closest thing to this Godly Essence that one can feel in a humanly form is love? It is very close, yes. However, there is something closer in my opinion. It is said that the very first creation of God was space, and I think this is a reasonable idea because, of course, if the first creation was anything other than space, well, where would you put it? You need some space to put it. So, I say space is the closest thing to God then, or Akasha, or the void, ether, vacuum. These Notions of pervasive emptiness, and The Emptiness part is the less important part, it's the feeling of pervasiveness. Whether you take the stance that that pervasiveness is filled or empty would again be another Duality. The Buddhists say it's empty, they say an Atma, no self. It is just emptiness, but the Hindus take the position that it is filled with self.

it is completely filled, but the point is, yeah, the point is there is some pervasive field, and that pervasiveness is the first attribute of God, the closest attribute. But there is a very close relationship between pervasiveness and love. Love is a very pervasive feeling. The more we love, the more we feel open, the more we feel a spread across our awareness, around our sense perception, etc. [Music] Yeah, I've never heard it put like that, but I like that a lot. It's almost like love is what balances out that pervasiveness. It's like I just picture committed potentiality, infinity, pervasiveness, something that I truly can't comprehend and fathom, but then love is almost the beginning together of that. Yeah, yeah, the balance. It's the homogenizer, the great homogenizer. Wow, this is good. This is good, man. Yeah, you practice. Yeah, deep breath on that one. That's good. You're something else, man. I don't know who you are, but you're something else. I'm glad to talk to you.

here well I'm you yeah I am you and you are me yeah that's a big one when we all realize we're we are the same pervasiveness right what else are we supposed to do yeah and I guess that's where one can say that how we got ourselves into a sense of Calamity and chaotic world is because we're we're ignoring the identity of our pervasiveness so it's like rather than loving bringing together we're pushing that away we're creating more pervasiveness out of almost like an identity crisis yeah right but I think we need that in a way I mean I don't know if we need that but it's almost like we need that to reach a certain point where it just comes back around into love yeah yeah I don't even know if that made sense but yeah all breaths need a contraction and an expansion yeah yeah hmm it's beautiful man it's beautiful so I mean what do you got plans for the future you know what do you what what is

your where's your creative Knack and creative Pursuits gonna go from here you know or is it more just a spontaneous thing. Oh I don't bother thinking about the future that much. There is no future right no but truly a lot of people say that but um such is the reason I scheduled this so soon is I had uh two people reach out to me about for a podcast the same time it was you and another lovely lady and uh she said that there was a spot you know at the end of May beginning of June. I thought what is that I don't how am I supposed to know if I want to do that then you know yeah yeah like I don't even know what I'm gonna eat tonight so how am I supposed to plan that far ahead. So I am in a very particular place where it is easier for me to do something the less I plan [Music] and that is very much enveloped in this idea that if I concentrate really hard on attending to this moment I don't have to worry about the future.

because I'm not living in it, but I all have carved out precisely whatever I need to by appending to what is here currently. I like and it's very real to me, yeah, and it's almost like once we worry more about the future, it actually inhibits our future. Like there's this guy, isn't that funny how it works like that, yeah, some kind of law, I don't know, yeah, it's inbuilt into the system, yeah, it's like, and it sounds cliche, but it's true. Like the more that we're just so engrossed in the moment, in the here and now, it actually makes for a better here and now in the future at the end of May, yeah, yeah, yeah. I don't know just how it works, so yeah, your answer I guess is then just spontaneous, right? You just kind of flowing with it, oh yeah, yeah, which is, you know, it could be said to for nearly every question, but it's really true. It's cliche for a

reason yeah, yeah. Oh man, good stuff, good stuff. I don't know what else to say, man. You're leaving me speechless in this one. That's sometimes nice, yeah, right? You don't always have to talk, but it helps for a podcast. Yeah, exactly. I was gonna say it's ironic because we're doing a podcast. [Laughter] Uh, yeah. Imagine that, just the whole podcast, or it's just a recording, and it's nothing. It's just like, yeah, just intermittent Labs, yeah, it laughs, breathing here and there. Yeah, you'd go crazy. Yeah, man. Say, um, this may be not even useful to think about because we just said the future is the future, and the here now is the here and now, so why think about it? But I'm gonna ask anyway. Sure. Do you um, do you have hope or a positive outlook for our world and humanity as a whole? Like, do you think there's light at the end of the tunnel, per se, um, to where we're going and others' mindsets?

um yeah I don't I don't have any other way to say it. Do you have yeah hope for the world? Yeah, it's a good question, an interesting question. We could look at it in so many different ways. I think I'm not worried because nothing is not foreseen. It's not like this is new to us that we're seeing such a decline in a lot of the things we used to hold as high virtues because even in the most ancient scriptures we see that Humanity has a cyclic approach to Evolution over the course of many ages. We beat each other up, we destroy our surroundings, then in that intense space of guilt we make amends and do something great. And it's clear we're in the downward Arc right now. You would it would take the force of a God to swing Us in the other direction right now. The entities which are driving the downward Arc are so much greater than uh anything that can be achieved through things like peaceful protest or or law making, you know, like like the the

a better state of the world isn't a phone call of your representative away. It requires a dramatic revolution, you know. Yeah, um, but one thing that gives me peace is that we've separated ourselves, one of these many dualities between us and the planet. We say we're destroying the planet. I didn't realize we were something separate from it, you know. Humans are destroying nature. Now, aren't we a part of nature? We say when a bee builds a bee nest, we say the bee's nest is an extension of the bee, and thus the bee is a part of nature, and so the hive is natural. But when we build a house, we say, Oh, we've destroyed the forest, even though it is still a part of it. Yes, we've changed it dramatically in sacrifice of a lot of other sentient beings' chance of life, but we are a part of that original nature. Nature is us, and so it is nature that is destroying itself. And nature has the right to destroy itself if it wants, but it also has the right to combat this and

It has the right to search for healing, and such is both sides of humanity right now, and so both are valid in this pursuit right now. And I think no matter how bad the state of humanity gets, nature will survive. Yeah, I agree. And if you can identify with nature, the Earth, maybe even the entire cosmos, then in a way, you could see that you always survive. There'll always be some kind of life, you know why, some kind of energy, some kind of energetic pursuit toward novelty. Yeah, yeah, the best way to directly see that, because a lot of us, we hear that, but yet there still is intellectual doubt, there still is a debate within our minds of, you know, will I survive after death, you know, I don't truly realize it to be true in this experience right now. This one, we're looking at each other through the screen. Screen is a good metaphor because our whole field of view is like a screen. Yeah, there's some, you know, it's hard to find where the boundary is. It kind of just keeps going, but then it clearly is not.

infinite, but whatever. Here's the screen. Sound also has a sort of screen to it, yeah, a sort of space in which it all takes place in, yeah. So does taste and smell species, right? No spectrums, multi-dimensional spectrum. Our body, we can really feel a sense of touch throughout our whole body. We can. It's a very weird feeling to feel the inner field of your hand. Not only can you feel when you touch the surface, but there is an innerness to that sense of touch too, a sort of pervasive feel. Do you feel this Prana throughout the whole body? Notice then that this field never changes despite all the objects within it changing. That when you close your eyes, your sense of sight doesn't go away. There still is an experience of sight. It's just an experience of the absence of light, such as why we have a word for blackness. You know, if we really couldn't see blackness, then we wouldn't even be aware of it. We would have no word for it. So, we still see when our eyes are closed, just

the absence of color. So notice then that when we close our eyes, it is not that we are taking away the world, but the world is almost dissolving back into that nothingness, that blackness. Which is what do you see now at the back of your eyelids. That is the firmament upon which the sense of sight occurs. It's not the absence of sight; it is what occurs beneath it always. And we can play this game for all the senses. That silence is not the absence of sound, but is the background layer in which sound occurs within. And we don't have nice words for the other senses except for stillness, which is the background layer of the sense of touch. And when we can abstractify this just one level more and see that all senses occur in awareness, and that same awareness which we experience in deep sleep, how could that ever leave you when there is no quality about it to leave? It is the background layer in which your body occurs. Are you aware of your body, or is your body aware of you? Of course, you're aware.

of your body. Thus, the body is within you as your field of awareness. It's just that this body leaves you upon death. Hmm, yet there's always the background there, the unmanifest, the unmanifest all-pervading. Um, oh yeah, exactly. It's not Krishna consciousness. Hmm, beautiful. That was so well said. Ah, it's like immortality is a mindset in a way, the very firmament of the Mind. [Music] Wow, oh God, speechless again. That was good. Ah, speechlessness, the background layer of speech. Yeah, I like how you said Stillness is the absence of touch. You could even say Stillness is the absence of all senses. Yes, yes, it's the before the sensation of the sense, but it's also the sense in the sensor at the same time. There's that connection, and in that connection, the two become one, and in that one is the Stillness. It's hard to explain even in my words. I know there was some contradictory Duality there, but no, it's understandable.

yeah, it is bliss absolute um yeah man Hallelujah huh Hallelujah uh yeah that's what's beautiful about Sanskrit is there is there's certain expressions and there's certain words that English doesn't quite pinpoint as well as some Sanskrit sayings yeah my favorite kind of meta proof for this is you could translate Sanskrit into English but you'd be missing the fact that there are many English words that don't have a whole Wikipedia page dedicated to them whereas almost every Sanskrit word has pages and pages of meaning yeah you know agony is not just fire you know it is 10 000 slokas of meaning about fire in the metaphor behind it that's really powerful it's like the words carry more weight oh yeah oh yeah they are Divine weapons that can pierce the veil of ignorance hmm and some say it's just through the frequency as well which that's like another layer of meaning because there's the base level meaning that you can look up in Wikipedia But then some say I don't know

but I feel that when I do Mantra, yeah, um, they almost reveal themselves to you, yeah. You don't need to understand the linguistic translation, yeah. My favorite example of that is the start of the Gayatri Mantra, which is three words while preceded by om, um. [Music] yeah, and you can almost, without translation, see that we're starting with some concept, which is said as then the next word is which is obviously something like boor, but ah, but above. So we're immediately being taken on a journey through something and then something above it, and then much like buva, we say so we're going above again. So the start of this Mantra guides our awareness up without even having to know with what [Music] means, yeah, wow. And then the very next line of that, we say taught. So we're no longer raising up, we've like hit it, we say right, we've hit it. So we're going up and then we fixate our Awareness on something, yeah, wow. And so all mantras in this way

reveal themselves, but I think the most common criticism that someone might say is, Well, that gives you the general feel, sure, but I want to know the specific meaning. And to that, I would say there is no specific meaning of a mantra; its power is in its generality, its power is in its pervasiveness, universality. So, that feeling that it gives you is the specificity, specificity, specificality that you need. Yeah, yeah, it's like you get lost in the current of it rather than, it's like, yeah, it transcends the thinking part of the brain. That's, it's almost like that's what it's used for, is to, you to become the mantra, and almost seems as though you use a different part of your brain, which is one to use a different part of your being, that intuitive sense. Exactly, yeah, it would be hard to enter that trance-like state with something very specific. You know, you couldn't utter the quadratic formula and enter a trance because it's very specific. Yeah, so true. Sometimes I hear songs where

it's a Sanskrit Mantra, and then they repeat it in English, and like, the English just doesn't, it doesn't, it doesn't hit, does it? No, it doesn't mean that. Ain't it? Yeah. Hmm. I feel like, I don't know, I'm just throwing it out there. If I were to become fluent in Sanskrit, it would change the way that I think radically. Yeah, it probably changed the way that I see myself, my whole being in the world. It would have to. Oh, absolutely. You know, imagine your word for flower has a 10,000-year history of stories. And of course, you could say that about a lot of languages, but the most amazing part about the culture surrounding Sanskrit is that every word is venerated as a god. You know, you can talk about fire as Agni, but you can also talk about Agni as the cosmic fire god. And that's unconsciously will be invoked every time you just say the word fire or flower or water or air. You know, every single word is the name of God, whereas

in English, we really have one, and it's g-o-d. Yeah, and even that, that's a little corrupted. Yeah, wow, that's good. Yeah, that puts a lot more meaning into the utterance of the word became flesh. It's like, at first, like our first, before we came into this physical material matter, it seems as though we're like a form of information, and from that information, somehow sprouted the body. But it seems like our essence, in a way, is more tied to just, yeah, the word, which seems like a form of code. Yeah, it's like God is information, right? It's greater than that, but it seems like a higher essence is like some kind of information that is codified. The logos, exactly. Yeah, the logos. It's good. It's good stuff. Oh man. Hmm. That's why it's so important to say the right things to yourself, you know? Everything, everything is about the words that we use, how we speak to ourselves within our own mind is certainly very important. Yeah, yeah, guess the key is knowing how to program.

one's mind to say the right things. I would first let go of words like program or reprogram because they carry an intonation with them, which is that there was some force that made you like this, and now it's your duty to fix yourself, or that, well, that's what reprogram my field like carries to me, um, and it almost gives back power to that exact thing that you are saying to have been reprogrammed from because you are still giving it that authority over the fact that they were once able to change you, hmm. So, forgiveness comes in very much like that, but program is a very good metaphor because when we program something, it is like a certain designing a certain architecture, but an architecture of circuitry and logic itself, and in that way, I see it as very powerful as long as we recognize that no reprogramming is necessary for the soul, for that consciousness is unaffected by the goings-on of the mind and body, not only now but always. There's a very gross metaphor in Hinduism which is hilarious to me.

um but it actually serves a really good point, which is that does a puddle of urine get um change the properties of light when it is reflected, not the properties in the color, things like that, but is the light of the sun destroyed or disturbed or or made gross by reflecting in the puddle of urine? Well, no, it it does yes become reflected, refracted literally by it, but that doesn't make you feel gross when the light hits you in the eye. It's not like, Oh no, P light, it hit my retinas. It's still just the pure yellow, pure white. It is unaffected by the contents of what it is reflected upon, and in the same way, no matter how chaotic, how much our mind has decayed from an ideal state, the consciousness is forever unaffected by it, forever pure, yeah, mm-hmm. Yeah, it's kind of getting back to what we were talking about before with um the unmanifest. I would have to say to that though is if one is unaware of the unmanifest, that that constant light

that's when the programming can become distorted in a way. As in, so when one does tap into the soul, I guess it makes it easier to see the puddle of urine a little bit differently. So one that grossed out, right? So it's like, it's not that we do any kind of, it's like we don't, yeah, we don't reprogram, but we something the light, I guess. Once you tap in, does a sort of reprogramming though, you know? Like there is still a difference of like nothing changes but the perspective, the conscious perspective. So it's not reprogramming or programming, yeah, maybe those are the wrong words, but there is a different. I like the words that Ramakrishna used. He said the spiritual experience is becoming like an ant, where from that infinitesimal perspective, you can sort out between the grains of sugar and sand, even in a whole bag or pot with sand and sugar mixed almost homogeneously. From us, from our big ego perspective, we can't sort out sugar from

Sand we get this, and we think, well, it's basically all just sand. This is useless. Even if it was 10 sand, I'm not eating sand and sugar. Yeah, but an ant sees these big boulders of sugar and sand and thought, this is useful. This is still absolutely useful. So, the ant is able to discern between the sugar and the sand at that level. In the same way, the Seeker of Truth, discernment is that power that we speak of now, the discernment between the real and the unreal, and that can only be given by a qualified teacher, sometimes not necessarily physically, but through your own private study, your own Awakening, and they are somewhere in the shadow, somewhere have been guiding you. [Music] The discernment between the real and the unreal is the quest that the Buddha described, between Noble and ignoble. That which can be said to be permanent, only that is the noble Quest, and that which cannot be said to be permanent but can only be said to be impermanent is an ignoble Quest.

So, in a similar way, sugar is that real permanence, and the sand is the unreal impermanence. With this discernment, we can reprogram, and this discernment alone. Mm-hmm, well said. Yeah, it's like that discernment acts as a filter with the sand and the sugar in this metaphor. And even though if it's 90 percent sugar and 10 sand, yeah, it'll all filter through some kind of effortlessly. Yeah, oh yeah, well said. That was the word I was looking for in discernment. That's really what comes about, it seems, sense of discernment and discrimination in one's life, but it's intuitive. Getting back to that, it's just like this effortless. Yeah, it's just, it's just, you know. Yeah, once you've started, it's, you're already free from that point onwards. Because you, once you are given the power of discernment, you blossom naturally. Yep, wow. [Laughter] What are we blossoming toward? Are we all like becoming the Buddha in a way, our own Buddha?

well, that's a great matter of debate between the two main schools of Buddhism. Some say, No, no, Buddha was special, even more special to you, but others say, No, everyone is supposed to become Buddha-like, and there's truth to both perspectives, obviously. Of course, that same ideal that the Buddha strived for, you should also strive for, which is for the liberation of all other sentient beings. But at the same time, statistically, you're probably not going to have a whole religion built around you based on that. So, there is something special about the Buddha. Yeah, that's well said. Yeah, it's like we don't become Siddhartha Gautama but revere the qualities of his life and his lessons. We were supposed to become Sakyamuni, so yeah, it's both. Yeah, it's both, I guess. Mahayana and um, why can't I think of the other school of Buddhism? Yeah, yeah, yeah, Theravada. Yeah, I guess they're both true in a way. Yeah, interesting. Yeah, I like that. I think one of the most powerful pieces of discernment one can

be given when faced with The Duality like between the two main schools of Buddhism is in what way are the same and what way are they the same because surely that is true you know if we consider them like Venn diagrams whatever is in between them well then I don't have to choose between what's true and what's not true because it covers all possibilities already yeah and I would say in the grand Venn diagram of all belief systems is that sort of refinement of character and expression of a human being no matter what kind of stories or labels you want to put on it it's really just about very simply very simply becoming a better person at the end it's so true and it's very humbling to put it that way yeah because we make spiritual spiritual experience to be this this new thing which only a select few people go on and they get elevated to a Godly status but from an absolute perspective even the spiritual path is just coming to that simple fact of

the Golden Rule: being kind, just being humble, so true. We're all walking each other home in one way or the other. Oh man, you know what? On that note, I think we can probably wrap it up. Um, unless you have something else to say. Do you have anything else you want to get off your chest, anything you want to say? No. Why don't we end with a random verse from The Tao teaching? Oh please, yes. This is 35. If the sign of life is in your face, he who responds to it will feel secure and fit as when in a friendly place, sure of hearty care. A traveler gladly waits, though it may not taste like food, and he may not see the fare or hear a sound of plates. How endless it is and how good, wonderful. Hmm, I don't think there is anything left to say after that. I thank you. I thank you. Namaskar. Namaskar. Namaste. Peace and love. Shalom. Shalom and goodbye. Goodbye everybody. Peace and love to anybody that listened this long.

peace and love to you, yam socks. Um, yeah, this was great. I really appreciate your time, effort, and wisdom. Uh, thank you. Love you, brother. Love you too, man. Um, yeah, peace out, everybody.

Mathematics and Mysticism with Lyam Boylan (Yamsox) | The Conscious Perspective [#149]

Gary Lee Haskins

이 연사는 바보의 원형에서 영감을 받아 변화를 유도하고 사람들을 현재의 순간으로 끌어들이는 것을 목표로 온라인에 등장합니다.

과거나 미래에서 길을 잃지 않고 현재의 의식적인 경험을 즐기는 것이 중요하다는 점을 강조합니다.

수학과 논리를 통한 연사의 여정은 무의 상호 연결성과 모든 가능성의 근원에 대한 깊은 깨달음으로 이어져 궁극적으로 과학과 종교 사이의 공통점을 발견하게 됩니다.

연사는 숫자의 임의적 특성과 수학에서 9가지 공리의 중요성에 대해 이야기합니다.

0이 가장 덜 자의적인 숫자이며, 모든 숫자는 궁극적으로 동일하다는 것을 제안합니다.

이 대화에서는 직관과 이성의 관계를 탐구하며 새로운 통찰력을 발견하는 데 있어 직관적 안내의 중요성을 강조합니다.

직관은 통제력을 포기해야 하는 흐름으로 설명되며, 사랑과 이해는 동일한 근본적인 힘의 두 가지 측면으로 서로 연결되어 있습니다.

관성과 흐름 중 어느 한쪽이 너무 강하면 불균형을 초래할 수 있으므로 균형을 이루는 것이 필수적입니다.

연사의 일상에는 수학자 존 콘웨이의 연구에서 영감을 받아 수학 연구를 돕는 프로그래밍이 포함됩니다.

초현실적인 숫자의 발견과 신의 본질

해켄부시 게임은 익숙한 숫자를 넘어선 숫자의 우주를 나타내는 초현실적 숫자의 발견으로 이어졌습니다.

신의 개념은 속성과 절대적 실재라는 측면에서 논의되며, 진정한 비이원적 실재는 방정식이나 기호로 포착할 수 없음을 시사합니다.

이 대화에서는 신의 본질, 우주, 사랑 사이의 관계를 탐구하며 이 둘의 만연한 본질과 신을 이해하는 데 있어 이들의 역할을 강조합니다.

연사는 인류의 공통된 정체성과 보편성에 대해 성찰하며 이러한 연결을 무시할 때 혼란과 재앙가 발생한다고 말합니다.

또한 미래에 대한 걱정이 긍정적인 결과를 저해할 수 있다며 현재를 사는 것의 중요성을 강조합니다.

또한 인류 진화의 주기적 특성과 인간과 자연의 상호 연결성에 대해 이야기하며 우리가 영향을 주고받는 지구와 분리되어 있지 않다고 주장합니다.

치유를 추구하는 것은 인류에게 유효한 여정이며, 자연의 생존은 필연적입니다.

우리의 감각과 경험은 서로 연결되어 있으며, 인식은 항상 배경이 되는 층위입니다.

산스크리트어의 풍부한 어휘와 만트라의 힘은 존재와 의식에 대한 더 깊은 이해를 제공합니다.

만트라는 뇌의 사고 영역을 초월하는 보편성과 보편성에서 그 힘을 얻습니다.

모든 단어를 신으로 숭배하는 산스크리트어의 독특한 문화는 언어에 심오한 의미를 부여합니다.

연사는 자기 대화의 중요성과 관점 전환의 필요성을 강조하며 진정한 변화는 마음을 다시 프로그래밍하는 것이 아니라 영혼을 활용하는 데서 비롯된다고 말합니다.

분별력은 현실과 비현실을 구별하는 능력으로, 진리를 찾는 구도자에게는 필수적인 능력입니다.

부처님의 영속성과 무상함에 대한 탐구는 이러한 분별력을 반영합니다.

궁극적으로 영적인 길은 더 나은 사람이 되고 친절과 겸손과 같은 자질을 구현하는 것입니다.