The Bayesian Brain and Meditation

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 14 янв 2025

Комментарии • 26

  • @olinichol4167
    @olinichol4167 Год назад +19

    I recently listened to your discussion with Sam Harris on his podcast, and subsequently found your talks here. These have been the most useful explanations in joining together my experiences with meditation that I have come across. Your talks have left me with a renewed sense of purpose for my meditative endeavours. Thank you Shamil!

  • @WackyConundrum
    @WackyConundrum 2 года назад +15

    This is easily one of the most fascinating talks I've listened to this year! An outstanding explanation of the changes one goes through in the meditation practice through the lens of Bayesian Brain.

  • @yogalap
    @yogalap 2 года назад +6

    Peace and blessings Shamil. Keep spreading this wonderful knowledge.

  • @hyungdongkim8959
    @hyungdongkim8959 Год назад

    Excellent lecture!

  • @alexisleggeri3945
    @alexisleggeri3945 Год назад +3

    That was a hell of a presentation! The Western and Eastern traditions finally have a proper encounter after some failed attempts. Many thanks and keep up the good work!

  • @indragesink
    @indragesink Год назад

    The “subterrenean passage” that, through ourselves, we have contact with reality is yet another example of reifying awareness, that you warranted against just beforehand.

  • @pieterhogendoorn7818
    @pieterhogendoorn7818 8 месяцев назад

    Wonderful. Thank you, Shamil Chandaria!

  • @AdamWoodhams
    @AdamWoodhams 2 года назад +3

    Incredibly interesting

  • @simonkkkkkk
    @simonkkkkkk 2 года назад +2

    This talk is really good! The first part might be the most well explained introduction to PP I’ve seen on RUclips

  • @peterrosqvist2480
    @peterrosqvist2480 Год назад

    Thank you for the revelatory talk

  • @skipper.mindplayers
    @skipper.mindplayers Год назад

    Thank you so much, what a journey. Impressive combination of state of science, personal experiences with enthusiasm and clear, understandable metaphors and language. Enough references to sources and scientific basis for experts and still understandable for lay people. For an old powerpoint guy, your charts have been super helpful and adding a lot of value. I love your humbleness, intellect, curiosity and enthusiasm and wish you wonderful progress and many further "mind-blowing" insights. 🙏

  • @FredHosea
    @FredHosea Год назад

    This is an EXCELLENT, OUTSTANDING synthesis and visualization of enormously complex, multi-dimensional/spatial realities and representational challenges. My question has to do with the possibly fractal nature of consciousness, and how the eudaemonic model may well clarify the *personal/subjective* dimension of consciousness and wellbeing, but doesn't seem to include the enormous suffering of others, from war, disease, exploitation, violence, etc. that result from organizational and institutional evil doing -- i.e., they behave like flawed/deformed fractal distortions of human nature and purpose. Why do organizations and institutions embody "collective" dimensions of representations of human interests -- but do so with certain fatal flaws that make them behave more like Frankenstein's monster than like higher-dimensional humans?

  • @indragesink
    @indragesink Год назад

    The vertical and left-right dimensions at 1:03:00 are actually the same in your previous division into 3 around 48:00, which is by the way also reflected in the examples being perfectly correlated in those two dimensions. The third part of the 3 divisions of 48:00 is (as a result) not reflected at around 1:03:00.

    • @indragesink
      @indragesink Год назад

      Non dual insight is at first part of the deconstructive meditations, in other words, not of the constructive class, which is does not return in the later plot.

  • @shahilgoodka6132
    @shahilgoodka6132 2 года назад +3

    This has inspired another stab at meditation, especially a program including consistent positive constructive practices. Thank you, Shamil! Any recommendations on which practice you’ve found most effective to create more beautiful ways of looking which stick around are really welcomed :)

    • @ShamilChandaria
      @ShamilChandaria  2 года назад +6

      I think classical loving kindness meditation (Metta) is a great place to start.

    • @IlmariLahti
      @IlmariLahti 2 года назад

      This also seems to be a good match for Shinzen Young's system, which is more complicated than most, but also "industrial strength" as he puts it.

  • @remyshah1
    @remyshah1 2 года назад +1

    Thank you for sharing this wonderful knowledge. It’s very insightful and thought provoking .
    If meditation is about leading to nothingness , how does one establish which state one is in?

  • @yoananda9
    @yoananda9 Год назад

    Very interesting. Reminds the work of Frank Heile on what is spiritual enlightenment. Did you publish a paper on it ? I could not found anything.

  • @FrancisNortonLondon
    @FrancisNortonLondon Год назад

    So much great stuff here. But I have a big question about a tiny point - the thumbnail experiment (ruclips.net/video/Eg3cQXf4zSE/видео.html) suggests "look at your thumbnail, and your thumbnail is about all you can see directly and in colour. The rest is in back and white, in a real mess". Now I have tried this and my peripheral vision is definitely in colour. I wonder how many of us have monochrome v. colour peripheral vision - am I unusual, or is Shamil (who I'm sure will have tried it himself) unusual?

  • @Bugsy0987987
    @Bugsy0987987 Год назад

    Is there a simpler explanation? I didn't finish my Massachusetts degree, and it's all Greek to me, a billion formulas.

  • @TheVinesettj
    @TheVinesettj Год назад

    Is it possible to reach the Jhanas without all of the religious requirements?

  • @SpenderDebby-x6n
    @SpenderDebby-x6n 3 месяца назад

    Martin Cynthia Robinson Gary Jones Richard

  • @nicksyoutubeaccount
    @nicksyoutubeaccount Год назад +1

    Seems too difficult to understand without a background in science...

  • @dommccaffry3802
    @dommccaffry3802 Год назад

    I see 1 hour 40 minutes, and i think "NO".