メインコンテンツまでスキップ

宿命通は（奥義を極めた聖者のみが獲得できる超越的な能力ではなく）意識障害の副産物であることを論証する

· 約94分

前置き​

宿命通とは AI によると…

AI

宿命通（しゅくみょうつう）とは、仏教用語で、前世の自他の生存状態を自在に知ることができる神通力を意味します。六神通（ろくじんずう）のひとつです。

六神通とは、禅定を修めることで得られる超人的な能力のことで、天眼通、天耳通、他心通、宿命通、神足通（神境通）の五神通に漏尽通を加えたものです。

六神通の他の能力には、次のようなものがあります。

  • 天眼通（てんげんつう）：普通の人の見ることのできない事象を自由自在に見通すことのできる力

  • 天耳通（てんにつう）：あらゆる苦悩のうめき声を聞きもらさない耳の力

  • 他心通（たしんつう）：あらゆる苦悩の心のうちを知り尽くす力

  • 神足通（じんそくつう）：思いのままに行きたいところに行けたり、姿を変えることができたり、また環境を変えることのできる力

  • 漏尽（ろじん）通： 煩悩が尽きて、今生を最後に二度と迷いの世界に生まれないことを知る智慧。生まれ変わることはなくなったと知る力

以下では、宿命通について多分これまで誰もなし得なかったであろう説明を試みる。単なる私の憶測ではなく、具体的なデータに基づいて論証を行う。

後日、宿命通を詳しく記述した仏教経典（沙門果経）の該当箇所を引用する予定だが、今は時間がないので OCR 処理まで手が回らない。

粗筋​

最初に、

  1. その具体的なデータを提示し、

  2. 続いてそのデータの意味するところを述べ、

  3. その上で、宿命通が意識障害の副産物であることを論証する。

細かな説明はダルいので、詳しい説明は AI に代わってもらう。

データに関する背景説明​

Anthony Peake が、そのデータを 2つ話題にしてる。最初のデータ（ギロチンの件）は過去記事でも取り上げたが、2番目のデータは初紹介。この 2番目のデータが重要でタイトルの主張に密接に関連する。

データの和訳には「悪魔」となっているが、Anthony Peake が使う Daemon という言葉には彼独特の意味があり、それは短く言えば

ChatGPT-4o

Anthony Peake の「Daemon（デーモン）」は、人間の意識の二重構造を説明する独特な概念です。彼は、日常的で時間に制約された「自己（Eidolon）」と、時間を超越し、過去や未来を見通せる「高次の自己（Daemon）」が存在すると仮定します。「Daemon」は危機的状況で直感や予感を与えるガイド的役割を果たし、Peake の「永遠回帰」仮説では、過去の人生の記憶を持ち、同じ失敗を回避する助けになるとされています。彼はこの仮説を古代哲学、量子物理学、脳科学の観点からも探求し、意識や時間の本質を考える新しい視点を提示しています。

となり、より詳しく言えば

▼ChatGPT-4o 展開

Anthony Peake は、意識や現実の本質を探求する独特な仮説を提唱するイギリスの作家で、特に彼の著作では「Daemon（デーモン）」という概念が中心的な役割を果たしています。この「Daemon」は、伝統的な宗教やオカルトで語られる霊的存在とは異なり、人間の意識や自己の二重性に関する仮説的なモデルとして提案されています。以下に、彼の「Daemon」概念を簡単に解説します。

1. Daemon とは何か？​

Peake の「Daemon」は、古代ギリシャ哲学の「ダイモーン（中間的な霊的存在）」や「高次の自己」に影響を受けています。しかし、彼の解釈ではより心理学的・科学的な側面を持ちます。具体的には、「Daemon」は個人の中に存在する、すべてを知る別の自己または意識の側面を指します。

  • Eidolon（アイドロン）との対比 Peake は、人間の意識を2つの側面に分けて説明します：

    • Eidolon（アイドロン）： 日常的な自己。時間を直線的に体験し、記憶に制約される普通の意識。
    • Daemon（デーモン）： もう1人の自己。時間の制約を超越し、未来や過去の全てを知っている「高次の観察者」的存在。

  • 簡単に言えば、**Eidolon は「今を生きる自分」、Daemon は「全てを見通す内なるガイド」**という構図です。

2. Daemon の役割​

Peake の理論では、「Daemon」は単なる理論上の概念ではなく、私たちの日常生活や体験に直接関係するとされています。

  • 人生の危機におけるガイド Peake は、何らかの危機的状況（例：命の危険、極限状態など）において、「Daemon」が個人に警告や助言を与えることがあると述べています。たとえば、「何かが起こる予感」や「直感的な判断」が「Daemon」による影響だと説明されます。

  • 輪廻転生と「永遠回帰」 Peake のもう一つの奇妙な仮説として、「永遠回帰」が挙げられます。彼は、私たちは人生を一度きりではなく、何度も繰り返し体験していると主張します。そして「Daemon」は、過去の人生の記憶を持っているため、同じ失敗を避けたり、より良い選択をするための助けとなる存在だとされています。

3. 科学的・哲学的背景​

Peake の「Daemon」仮説は、古代哲学やオカルトだけでなく、現代科学や哲学からも影響を受けています。

  • 量子物理学と時間の本質 Peake は、時間が私たちの認識とは異なり、非直線的または同時的である可能性に注目しています。「Daemon」は、この時間の非直線性を理解し、未来や過去を同時に認識できる存在として描かれます。

  • 脳科学と変性意識状態 彼は、変性意識状態（夢、瞑想、臨死体験など）を通じて「Daemon」の影響が現れると述べています。特に、脳内のニューロン活動や意識の相関性を仮説の裏付けとして取り入れています。

4. Peake の仮説の独自性​

Peake の「Daemon」理論は、以下の点でユニークです：

  • 個人の意識の二重構造を哲学的・科学的に説明しようとする試み。
  • 人間の直感や予感、人生の選択における不思議な体験を説明する仮説。
  • 古代哲学、現代科学、オカルトの融合。

5. 批判と評価​

Peake の理論は斬新で興味深いものの、科学的な検証が難しく、仮説の域を出ないという批判もあります。しかし、彼の著作はスピリチュアルや哲学的な視点を探求する読者にとって刺激的なものとなっています。

彼の「Daemon」という概念は、日常の直感や運命、時間の本質について新しい視点を与えるツールと考えられるでしょう。

というもの。

データの引用​

Anthony Peake の 2021年のインタビュー動画から、問題の発言部分を 文字起こし＋和訳 で引用する。2つ目のデータが重要。

  • 1つ目：「寝ていて板が首に当たった瞬間に、ギロチン刑を受けた経緯の長い夢」を見たという事例（心理学者の体験）

  • 2つ目：「赤子を 16歳になるまで Daemon として見守ったという体験」が催眠によって引き起こされたという事例

▼展開

FasterWhisper AI(large-v2 model) + DeepL(2024-07 model)​

デーモンは、ほとんどの人にとって大きな部分を占めているとあなたは言いましたね。それは、夢の中でデーモンがあなたに語りかけたり、潜在意識や意識に浸透するメッセージを伝えてくれるということですか。 私の場合、人生のすべてにおいて、眠っているときに時間の歪みを感じることが常にありました。そのため、非常に疲労しやすい自己免疫疾患を患っていました。 (0:26:25)

私は生涯ずっと、そのことに気づきませんでした。学校で居眠りをして、本当にすぐに、ほんの数秒間眠り、目を覚ますと、長い間続いたような夢を見ていました。 どうしてそんなことがあり得るのか、と思いました。ほんの数秒間眠っていただけなのに、長い間眠っていたように感じたのです。 （0:26:49）

それに、夢を見ていると、その夢の背景に、まるで長い歴史があるような気がすることがあります。人々や物事の長い歴史が感じられるのです。そして、目が覚めると、夢のことはあまり覚えていないのですが、その感覚だけが残っているのです。そのことについてお話いただけますか？ ええ、もちろんです。 （0:27:18）

このことについてはかなり詳しく書いています。私を魅了するものです。『時の迷宮』という本を書きました。2010年だったと思います。夢の中の時間遅延について、一章をまるまる割いています。でも、あなたが今言ったことも、私にはとても共感できるんです。夢を見ていて、自分が知っている場所に戻っていることに気づく、という感覚。 (0:27:36)

そこには以前にも行ったことがあり、地理やレイアウトも知っています。また、明晰夢を見ている人たちと非常に緊密に仕事をしています。明晰夢を見ている人たちと長年仕事をしています。 私自身も明晰夢を見たことがあります。経験したのは1度だけですが、非常に特別なものでした。 そして、そこにはもう一人の、ほぼもう一人の自分がいて、そこで人生を全うしていることを知るという考え方です。 （0:28:01）

つまり、愛し、子供をもうけているのです。そして、私は人生を全うした夢を見たことがありますが、目を覚ますと、人々を失ったという喪失感に襲われるのです。さて、その本では、このことについて歴史から多くの例を引用しています。そして、その例のひとつで、私が本当に本当に魅了されたのが、アルフレッド・モーリーという人物です。モーリーは1890年代の心理学者でした。彼は子供の頃、非常に重い熱病にかかりました。 (0:28:32)

熱病の中で彼は夢を見、フランス革命に巻き込まれました。彼は革命派グループの一員となり、マラーやロベスピエールなど、さまざまな人々と行動を共にしました。 (0:28:41)

そしてフランス革命と同じように、夢の中で彼はロベスピエールに罠にはめられ、大きな裁判にかけられます。夢の中の裁判で、彼は立ち上がり、長い弁明の演説を行います。彼は有罪となり、引きずり降ろされてパリの通りをバスティーユ広場まで引き立てられます。そこにはギロチンが置かれていました。 （0:29:09）

彼はギロチンの前に立ち、群衆に向かって長い演説をします。群衆は歓声を上げ、他のものもすべてそうでした。そして彼は頭を切り落とされるために頭を下げたのですが、首の後ろを何かが打ったのです。それはベッドの板でした。ベッドの板が外れて落ちてきて、彼の後頭部を打ったのです。 （0:29:28）

これは私を興味をそそりましたし、彼にとっても興味深いものでした。夢の終わりに起こった出来事を説明するために、夢全体が再現されたのです。ちょっと考えてみてください。これは驚くべきことです。彼の夢は、ギロチンで首を切られるというストーリー全体を再現するために、過去に戻ったのです。これが、彼が心理学者になった理由です。彼は、この時間歪曲の現象に興味を持っていたのです。 (0:29:55)

2つ目の例はさらに驚くべきものです。催眠術師がいました。名前はまったく思い出せないのですが、すぐに思い出すでしょう。その催眠術師は若い学生を催眠術にかけました。そして、学生に催眠術をかけ、あなたは過去に戻ります、と言いました。学生は夢のシークエンスの中にいて、長い草が生い茂る野原に立っていることに気づきました。 (0:30:24)

彼は空腹を感じます。そして長い草の中を歩き、子供の泣き声を聞きます。彼は下を見ると、包帯に包まれた赤ん坊が横たわっているのが見えます。 そして、その赤ん坊が空腹であることに気づきます。なぜなら、彼自身がその赤ん坊だからです。そして、赤ん坊の両親が現れ、赤ん坊を抱き上げ、ミルクを与え、ベビーカーに乗せ、連れ去ります。 （0:30:52）

その生徒は、その子が16歳になるまで、その子の人生をずっと追いかけていました。分刻みで、その子の人生すべてを体験し、その子を導いていたのです。 彼は事実上、悪魔だったのです。そして、その子供が大学進学を決意したとき、突然、彼は自分が目覚めていることに気づき、その部屋にいました。彼はトランス状態で約30分間離れていたのです。彼はトランス状態で16年間を過ごし、他人の人生を目撃していたのです。 （0:31:18）

今、また、もしその話について私を信じられないのであれば、参考文献を挙げておきます。 著者の名前を思い出してみますが、オルダス・ハクスリーが書いた本です。多くの人が、その話はオルダス・ハクスリー自身のことだと思っていますが、違います。日付が一致しません。そして、私の新しい本では、その点について日付が一致しないと述べています。 （0:31:38）

しかし、夢のシークエンスでは、私たちは異なる世界にいて、異なる知覚領域にいるということです。そして、あなたの例は、まさにその典型だと思います。 （0:31:50）

▼原文 展開

The daemon, you said that's a large part of it for most people, is that the daemon kind of talks to you in your dreams or gives you messages that maybe seep into the subconscious or even your conscious. For me, my whole life, I've always had these time distortions when I sleep. So I used to have an autoimmune condition where I would get very tired. (0:26:25)

I didn't even know it all throughout my life. I would fall asleep in school and I'd fall asleep just real quick, and just for a few seconds, and I'd wake up and I'd have this dream that seemed like things went on for a long time. And I would think, how could that possibly be? Because I was only out of sleep for a few seconds, but it felt like a long time. (0:26:49)

And also, sometimes I have dreams where I feel like there's a whole history behind it, behind whatever I'm dreaming about. There's a whole history of the people, the things, and it's like a feeling. And I just wake up and I don't remember much about the dream, but I have the feeling. And I mean, can you speak on that? Oh, yeah. (0:27:18)

I write extensively about this. It's something that fascinates me. And I wrote a book called The Labyrinth of Time, and I think it was 2010, I think it was now. And I have a whole section on time dilation in dreams. But also what you were saying there, it resonates totally with me, that feeling of you have a dream and you realise you're going back to a place you know. (0:27:36)

You've been there before, you know its geography, you know its layout. And again, I work very closely with people who lucid dream. And I've been working with lucid dreamers for many years now. And I've had one lucid dream myself. I've only experienced one, but it was quite extraordinary. And it's the idea that you know that there's another, almost another version of you that lived a whole life there. (0:28:01)

You know, they've loved, they've had children. And I've had those dreams where I've lived a whole life and you wake up and you have this terrible feeling of loss, you know, that you've lost the people. Now, in that book, I cite many examples from history of this. And one of the examples that I really, really fascinates me was a guy called Alfred Mowry. And Mowry was a psychologist in the 1890s. And when he was a child, he experienced a very, very heavy fever. (0:28:32)

And in the fever, he had a dream and he was involved in the French Revolution. And he was a member of the revolutionary group with Marat and Robespierre and various others. (0:28:41)

And as with the French Revolution, in the dream, he falls foul of Robespierre and he gets a big trial. And in the trial, in the dream, he stands up and he makes a big long speech to defend himself. He's found guilty. He's then taken down and he's taken through the streets of Paris in a tumble up to the Place de la Bastille, where the guillotine was. (0:29:09)

He then stands in front of the guillotine and makes this long speech to the crowds. The crowds cheer and everything else as well. Then he puts his head down to have his head chopped off and something hit him on the back of the neck. And it was the bed board. The bed board had come loose and it had fallen down and hit him on the back of the head. (0:29:28)

Now that intrigued me and it intrigued him for one important reason. A whole dream had been back created to accommodate what happened at the end of the dream. Now think about that for a second. This is extraordinary. His dream went back in time in order to create a whole story to have him being hit by a guillotine. That's why he became a psychologist because he was interested in this time dilation thing. (0:29:55)

The second example is even more extraordinary. There was a hypnotist. I can never quite remember his name. It will come to me in a second. And he hypnotised a young student. And he hypnotised the student and said, right, I hypnotise you and you're going back. And the student found himself in a dream sequence, standing in a field with long grass. (0:30:24)

And he feels hungry. And he walks through the long grass and he hears a child crying. He looks down and he sees a baby lying in a swaddling thing. And he realises the baby's hungry. And he realises the baby's hungry because he's the baby. And then the baby's parents turn up and they pick the baby up and they feed him and they put him in the pram and they take him away. (0:30:52)

The student followed that child right through his life until he was 16. Minute by minute, he lived this kid's whole life and experienced things and guided this kid. He was a daemon, effectively. Then when the kid decides to go to university, suddenly he finds himself waking up and he's in the room. He'd been away for about half an hour in a trance. He'd lived 16 years in a trance situation, witnessing somebody else's life. (0:31:18)

Now, again, if you don't believe me about that story, I give the references in the book. And I'll try and remember the name of the author, but it is in a book written by Aldous Huxley. A lot of people believe that that story was Aldous Huxley himself, but it wasn't. The dates don't mix. And in my new book, I say that the dates don't mix in terms of that. (0:31:38)

But suffice to say, it means that in dream sequences, we're in different worlds, we're in different perceptual fields. And I think your example is a classic there. (0:31:50)

動画(57:06)​

New Anthony Peake Interview 2021 - Part 2

www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-TqVMWzQQo

論証​

  • AI との対話の導入部分は省略
  • 当初、私自身の文章でもっと細かに論証しようとしたが、AI に簡単なヒントを与えるだけで、AI が敷衍してくれるので、それで代用する。もっと洞察を深めたいところだが、今は時間が取れないし、ダルい。当面は AI の敷衍で足りる筈。
  • 2番目のデータは孤立事例ではない。他にも同様の事例がある。後日、その事例を追加するかも（書庫を探すのがダルい）。

Me:

さて、Anthony Peake は Daemon の概念に絡めて以下のような事例を語っています。１つ目は「寝ている時に板が首に当たった瞬間に、ギロチン刑を受けた長い夢」を見たという事例。２つ目が「赤子を 16歳になるまで Daemon として見守ったという体験」が催眠によって引き起こされたというものです。以下が Anthony Peake の発言の文字起こしです。ここまでは、よろしいですか？ よろしければこの事例を元に議論を行います。

(文字起こしの該当部分を引用)

ChatGPT-4o

ありがとうございます。これらの事例をもとに議論を進める準備が整いました。以下に事例の要点を簡潔にまとめます。

  1. ギロチンの夢

ある心理学者が発熱中にフランス革命時代を舞台とする長い夢を見ました。夢の中で彼はギロチンで処刑される瞬間、実際にはベッドの板が首に落ちたことで目覚めました。これは夢が現実の出来事を辻褄合わせるように「逆向き」に構築された例とされています。

  1. 赤子の成長を見守った夢

催眠状態の学生が、赤子から16歳になるまでの人生をガイド（Daemon）として見守る体験をした事例です。夢の中では16年を詳細に過ごしたにもかかわらず、現実ではわずか30分の催眠状態でした。

このような事例は、Peake の Daemon 仮説が示す「夢や催眠が異なる知覚世界や時間感覚をもたらす」可能性を象徴しており、夢の時間的歪みや自己の二重性を考察する興味深い材料となります。どのような方向で議論を進めましょうか？

Me:

さて、仏教で六神通と言われる、いわゆる修行を完成させた聖者が獲得するとされる超能力があります。その中に宿命通という能力があります。この宿命通（＝自己の無数の過去世を想起する能力）の正体は、実は先の引用部分で挙げた 2番目の事例と同じ機序ではないか…これが私の仮説です。どうですか？

ChatGPT

とても興味深い仮説です！Anthony Peake の Daemon 仮説に基づく「赤子を見守った催眠体験」と仏教の六神通の一つである「宿命通」を同じ機序で説明するというのは、非常に独創的な視点です。これについて、いくつかの観点から整理しながら議論を深めましょう。

  1. 宿命通と赤子の事例の類似点

時間の超越

宿命通では、自分の無数の過去世を詳細に想起する能力があるとされます。一方、赤子の事例では催眠状態の学生が、赤子から16歳になるまでの人生を詳細に体験しています。どちらも「通常の時間感覚を超越した連続的な体験」が特徴です。

知覚の拡張

宿命通の体験者は、ただ過去を記憶するのではなく、それを「生きる」ように感じるとされます。赤子の事例でも、学生は単なる観察者ではなく、まるで「Daemon」として赤子を導いているかのような関与を示します。

記憶の再構築

宿命通や赤子の事例は、通常の記憶とは異なり、リアルタイムで「生きられた」記憶が再構築される点が共通しています。

  1. 仮説の成立可能性

Peake の Daemon 仮説や夢・催眠における時間の歪みによって、「宿命通」のような現象を説明できる可能性があります。この仮説を基に以下のように考えられます。

時間感覚の歪みとしての宿命通

赤子の事例において、30分の催眠状態で16年間を体験するのは、時間の主観的な伸縮を示唆します。もし宿命通も同じように、脳が「膨大な過去」を再構築しているとすれば、時間の歪みがこの能力の鍵かもしれません。

Daemon と宿命通の自己の二重性

宿命通を得た修行者は、過去世を詳細に見るだけでなく、それを俯瞰的に理解しているとされます。これは、Peake の Daemon が「高次の自己」として過去や未来を俯瞰する能力と類似していると言えます。

  1. 脳科学や量子物理学との関連

Peake は、脳の情報処理能力や量子物理学の時間の非線形性を使って、Daemon の存在を説明しようとしました。同じように宿命通を以下の視点で捉えることができます。

脳内での記憶再構築

脳が膨大な記憶を短時間で再構築し、体験として感じさせる仕組みがあるなら、宿命通もその延長線上にあると考えられます。

量子的な時間感覚

宿命通が「過去世の記憶」にアクセスする仕組みを、量子物理学的な時間の重なり（例えば、過去・現在・未来が同時に存在しているという考え方）で説明する可能性もあります。

  1. 仮説の挑戦と意義

仮説の魅力は、「宿命通」という宗教的な超能力を、科学的または心理学的なモデルで説明しようとする点にあります。これにより、宿命通を単なる信仰や神秘現象として片付けるのではなく、人間の意識や脳の未知の能力を探る切り口として再評価できます。

また、この仮説は次のような問いを引き起こします：

宿命通における「過去世の記憶」は脳内での再構築か、それとも外部情報（例：量子的な記憶フィールドなど）へのアクセスか？

Daemon のような「高次の自己」が、実際に脳内で働いていると証明する手段はあるのか？

結論として、この仮説は宿命通や Daemon に共通する現象を、時間の非直線性や意識の二重構造を鍵にして説明する試みとして非常に有意義です。仮説をさらに具体化するためには、夢や催眠、瞑想中の脳活動を研究する科学的アプローチが有効でしょう。この方向性についてさらに掘り下げて議論を進めたいですね。

Me:

私は Anthony Peake のように量子論でこじつけて過去世を実在とみなすのは無理がありすぎ、飛躍しすぎだと判断します。催眠で宿命通とほぼ同様の体験が起きるのであれば、ごく稀な「意識機能の錯誤」の結果として宿命通を捉えるべきだと判断します。

特に、六神通を得るためには、修行者は長期にわたる過酷な修行や瞑想に打ち込む必要があります。しかも誰もが達成できるわけではなく、ごくごく一部、おそらく 数千人に一人がそういった能力を獲得できる程度でしょう。

これは催眠と同様の効果を得る気質、体質、長期の修行による自己洗脳、脳へのある種のダメージといった条件が揃った時に起きる稀な現象とみるのが妥当かと。要するに、宿命通は超越的な能力ではなく、脳の誤動作の結果だと。

ChatGPT-4o

ご指摘の仮説は非常に理にかなっており、宿命通や Anthony Peake の Daemon の体験を「超越的能力」ではなく、脳の特異な機能や錯誤として説明するアプローチは、現代科学的な視点からはむしろ妥当性が高いと考えられます。以下にその視点を整理しつつ掘り下げてみます。

1. 宿命通を脳の「稀な意識現象」として捉える​

宿命通を「脳の誤動作」または「稀な意識現象」として捉える根拠は以下の通りです：

  • 催眠との類似性
    催眠状態では意識の通常の抑制機能が低下し、記憶や空想が過剰に活性化することがあります。宿命通の体験も、長期の修行による脳の特異な状態が催眠に似た効果を生み出している可能性があります。

  • 気質・体質による限定性
    宿命通を得られる修行者が極めて少ない点は、これが特定の脳の構造や気質に依存した現象であることを示唆しています。例えば、感受性が高い人や、自己暗示にかかりやすい人ほどこのような体験を得やすいかもしれません。

  • 脳の情報処理の錯誤
    脳は膨大な記憶や情報を保存していますが、その一部を自己のストーリーとして再構築する機能が、修行や瞑想によって異常活性化することで「過去世」をリアルに感じさせる可能性があります。

2. 修行の影響と脳への負荷​

長期にわたる瞑想や修行は、脳の可塑性や認知機能に強い影響を与えることが知られています。この過程で以下のような変化が宿命通に繋がる可能性があります：

  • 自己洗脳の効果
    瞑想の反復により「過去世」という概念を深く内面化することで、脳がそれを現実として「体験」する準備を整える可能性があります。

  • 脳へのダメージや特異な状態
    睡眠不足、極度の集中、栄養不足など、修行の過程で脳が通常とは異なる神経学的状態に陥ることで、非現実的な体験が引き起こされる場合があります。

  • 特定の脳領域の活性化
    瞑想が誘発する特定の脳波（アルファ波、シータ波など）の変化や、海馬や前頭前野など記憶や自己意識に関わる領域の異常活性化が、宿命通体験の一因である可能性があります。

3. 宿命通を「超越」ではなく「錯誤」と見る意義​

  • 神秘性を排除
    宿命通を脳の誤動作や自己暗示と見ることで、超越的な能力としての解釈を排除できます。これは、宿命通を科学的に理解するための第一歩となります。

  • 人間の意識の限界を知る
    宿命通が脳の「錯誤」であるならば、それは意識の持つ創造的側面や脆弱性を理解する上で重要な手がかりとなります。人間の脳がどれだけ「現実」を再構築できるかを示す例と言えるでしょう。

  • 不必要な飛躍を防ぐ
    Peake のように量子論を持ち込むことなく、観察可能な脳の作用や心理学的メカニズムをもとにした説明が可能になります。これは、仮説としての合理性と検証可能性を高めます。

4. さらに深めるべきポイント​

宿命通を脳の現象と見る仮説を補強するために、以下の研究やデータが役立つかもしれません：

  • 瞑想中の脳活動のリアルタイム測定（fMRI、EEG）
  • 催眠中の記憶再構築のプロセスと宿命通の体験比較
  • 宿命通体験者の性格特性や脳の個別差を調べる研究

結論として、宿命通は超越的な能力というよりも、長期の修行による脳の特異な状態が生み出した意識の錯誤現象と捉えるのが合理的です。このように見ることで、宿命通の謎は単なる神秘の領域に留まらず、科学的な探求の対象として扱えるようになるでしょう。

おまけ​

▼全体の文字起こし 展開

Hey guys, this is part two of my 2021 interview with Anthony Peek. If you haven't seen part one, the link to it will be in the description below. And with all that being said, let's just get right into part two with Anthony talking about Philip K Dick. Here it is. Enjoy. I wrote a book on the life of Philip K Dick a few years ago. (0:00:20)

I wrote a biography of Philip K Dick, the American science fiction writer. You read his books. You read his life. His daemon was incredibly active. Do you know that Philip K Dick actually described the circumstances of his own death in a letter? Did I mention this in the last interview? That I don't remember. Okay. But go ahead and state it for my audience, please. (0:00:40)

Okay. In, I think it was 1972 or 73, Phil Dick opened up a series of communications with a pen pal called Gloria Krentz Bush, who lived in Oregon. Phil lived down in the Bay Area in California. And I have, and if I'd have thought about it, I could have dug it out and shown you it because I've got a copy of it. He sent her a typed letter. And the letter's just general things. (0:01:08)

And then suddenly he stops. And he turns around in the letter. And he said, Gloria, I think I'm becoming Claudia. I was trying to remember if it was Gloria or Claudia. And he says, I think I'm becoming precognitive. And to paraphrase, he says, last night, during a stage of hypnagogic imagery, that's when you're half asleep, half awake, and these images come to you. (0:01:35)

You see faces moving and you see seascapes and everything else. Quite common phenomenon, which I also write about extensively. And it's within my cheating the Ferryman hypothesis, by the way. It's again, supporting information for this. But he said that I saw undersea cities. And then I saw one stark, clear image. Lying between a settee and a coffee table was a portly middle-aged man lying face down. (0:02:03)

Claudia, I think I've seen the future. Okay. Roll forward, I think it was to 1982, I think it was. Phil was living on his own. And every Tuesday night, there used to be a book club, which he used to attend. And one Tuesday night, he didn't turn up at the book club. So the next morning, they went round to his house and they had to knock the door down. (0:02:29)

They found Phil lying face down on the floor between a coffee table and the settee. He never regained consciousness. He died on the Saturday. He did regain consciousness. Tessa, his wife, has told me he did regain basic consciousness. And that's important to me that he did. Because if he did become conscious, he would have been aware of his set of circumstances where he was found. (0:02:54)

Which means that that information back went into his mind to his earlier self. (0:03:00)

And he saw the circumstances of his own death in a hypnagogic image. Powerful evidence. You know, you can't argue with that. The letter is there. The letter was sent. There is no doubt that that was faked. Now, I did a documentary for a French TV series on Philip K Dick, and they actually reproduced that set of circumstances in the documentary. You know, so that to me proves, you know, you get things like that all the time, which proved to me, if I'm not right, at least I'm damn close. (0:03:34)

You know, I'm not coming up with these wild theories that I don't bring proof back. You know, my hypothesis is proven time and time again by witnesses. Time and time and time again. I get people contacting me, I've just read your book, and it's blown my mind. You know, you said about the people who read my books, when people read my books, they become part of this. (0:03:56)

And they become part of it because it makes sense. You know, I just want to, but I have seen a few people ask, what about people that are born into atrocities, genocide, starvation, war, people that die as children? Are they born into that over and over again? Can they change it? And I think I know what you're going to say, because I read a response from you in one of your in one of the YouTube videos. (0:04:27)

What you need to do is to realise that you are living within your own phaneron. You are living within a program based upon your anticipations, your feelings, your thoughts. And these programs, these mini programs, overlap with other people's. And when you overlap with people, you're becoming part of them and your worldview and theirs. Because I come back to basic knowledge of how perception works. (0:05:00)

If you think what's out there is at what's out there, and you think that it is literally what you're seeing, that's nonsense. If you believe that, you're called a naive realist, okay? It's not what it seems out there. Out there is not anything like our brains tell us it is. We never interface with anything. We don't interface with the outside world. For instance, you're sitting on your seat now. (0:05:24)

There is no reason why you wouldn't fall through the floor. And the reason you don't is called electrostatic repulsion, which is the edges of every atom is negative and your bottom is positive. And literally, you never touch. You never touch a table. You never touch a chair. You never touch your wife. You never touch anything, okay? Also, in terms of seeing, you only see because photons are stimulating your retina in a certain way. Colour doesn't exist out there. There's no such thing as colour. It does not exist. (0:05:59)

It's called a qualia. Different creatures see different colours of different things. It just depends upon how your brain interprets that particular vibration of the electromagnetic spectrum. So that's the first thing. We never hear anything either. (0:06:11)

There are vibrations in your ear, but we never smell anything. This is why we can never compare. You can say that red is a bit like orange, but you can never describe red to anybody. You can never describe red to a blind person because they're qualia. Okay, so that's the first point. We don't interface with anything else. (0:06:34)

So what we're actually existing in is an internally generated facsimile of the external world. This, again, is a known fact. This is not, again, woo-woo stuff. Any perceptual scientist will tell you this, okay? So the question is, what is that external world we're perceiving? Well, we don't know really. It's a bit of a mystery. But it seems to be to do with holographics. (0:06:56)

It seems to be doing to... and this is going to blow your mind... it's to do with something with black holes. It's to do with the edge of the universe and how information is being bounced in from outside. In other words, everything around us is two-dimensional. And we think it's three-dimensional, but it's two-dimensional. Again, there's a paper written in 2003 in Scientific American that put this forward. (0:07:15)

Scientific American, by the way, not woo-woo news, Scientific American. So it's quite intriguing stuff. So the question is, if every outcome of every decision that is ever made is already programmed in to the megaprogram, it means that not only your life, but your parents' lives, your grandparents' lives, and every single life right back to the amoeba, right back to the first creatures, right back to the Paleozoic oceans, right back. (0:07:50)

Which means that every outcome of every decision that is made is already in there. Which means that the child that died and dies within... of starvation, dying within a few weeks. And my counter-argument to this is, okay, your counter-argument then is that child dies and my hypothesis is wrong and evil. That might be the only opportunity that child has to ever live. So you as an atheist are turning around and saying, that's it, that child just died in agony, lived for six weeks, died in agony. (0:08:25)

And that's all it ever was. That child, that was it. End of story. Whereas my argument is, there will be a set of circumstances that a child can exist within in the multiverse where they're not ill. Where they're existing in a version of the universe that their parents had different genetic makeup, in which case they didn't get the genetic disease, if I'm making sense here. (0:08:53)

So in that sense... In your universe, that child dies. So in that sense, in that other universe, that child will grow up to be an adult? Correct. Correct. Will grow up and live a full life in exactly the same way. Now, I can't prove this, but if the multiverse theory is correct, that every outcome of every instance, from some particle level onwards, anything that can happen will happen. (0:09:17)

Which means that that child will live a good and full life, okay, with their daemon. (0:09:23)

Now, I find that liberating. I find it far better than the idea that this poor little kid just dies in agony and never gets the chance for life again. Or they go back to Jesus and they go back to heaven. So what happens then? They go back to this heaven. They're up in the clouds with Jesus and everything else. Are they a child forever or do they grow up in heaven? (0:09:44)

And what kind of life would that be for a kid? Really seriously, imagine being a teenager in heaven. You've got all these, you know, you want to go out with people. You want to have a few beers. You want to have girlfriends, boyfriends. You're not going to have any of that in heaven. Heaven doesn't allow that. You're not physical, so you can't have any of that. (0:10:03)

Do you see my point? Yes. When we did our interview last time, I think I asked my audience after our interview, how many people believe in what Anthony Peake said, how many people believe more like the Tom Campbell line? And it surprised me a little bit because I thought people were more in line with the Tom Campbell, but half, about half the people, in my estimation, said that they agree with you, including my mother, who watches every one of my videos, by the way. (0:10:39)

Hi, mom. She believes because it makes sense that you remember something of your life so you can change it over and over. In that event, how many lives do you think that we live? And for those people who are maybe on their first few lives, are they having a much rougher time and it gets smoother as it goes on? And also, by us going back and living our lives over and over, how does that affect other people? Or is it just, it has no effect on them because it's all in a different universe? (0:11:13)

It's all in a different universe. That's right. So, you know, your different lives, but you're interfacing with real people. And one of the things that people argue is that my argument is extremely solipsistic, the idea that, you know, that everything emanates from you. It doesn't. It's not solipsistic at all. You will meet these people many, many times. You will meet the greater people all the time, you know, in many, many lives. (0:11:36)

You know, when people turn around and say, I've known you in many, many lives, what they're saying, what they're implying there is reincarnation, that, you know, we were together in medieval times or we were together in ancient Egypt or whatever. That's not the case. We've been together in this life. Now, it's a really good question as to whether it's progressive, whether it is iterative in terms of the cheating the ferryman lives or what. (0:12:04)

And I've come to the conclusion, and other people have pointed this out to me, that people's daemons will decide or will think, well, actually, I want to just explore this part of my life this time. I don't know how it's going to work out. (0:12:15)

And I'm going to make a decision that I didn't make last time that will take me out of my comfort zone and will take me to a place I don't really want to be. But I want to try that. And the daemon will think, you know, as you do in RPG games, where, you know, the open world RPG games, where you can go anywhere and you think, right, I'll go down that road now and I'll just see what happens. And this is the magic of my hypothesis, because, you know, you can do that. (0:12:43)

You can follow the yellow brick road or you cannot. And you can stay at home or you can, I'm going to go to Greece or I will, you know, I'll marry that person because this time around, I'll see how it works out. And next time I'll marry that other person and see how that works out. And all the time, your daemon is building up a database of all these lives and all the time. (0:13:04)

But I still believe that progressively, like the Hindus will argue, and I think I'm correct in saying that the Buddhists would argue as well, that you're trying to become God within. You're trying to become a bodhisattva. You're trying to become an enlightened being. And I believe that what happens is that over multiple lives, you live the perfect life. And you know when you've lived the perfect life, because you've done good for doing good's sake. (0:13:35)

Now, the question is, when you get to the end of that life, the Buddhists believe, and again, I think it's the Buddhists, that certain individuals, even in a reincarnation scenario, can choose to go back into the simulation to help other people. And they're called bodhisattvas. And I believe that some people do. But they're never going to say that that's what they're doing. In my life, I've met two people that I found to be extraordinary. (0:14:04)

As they say, old souls. There are people who just have this air of niceness and calmness about them. And I've never understood until I started researching myself as to what this could be. And I think it's because they are what I believe they are. They're people that have come back into the simulation in some way. (0:14:36)

Now, the question is, if it is a simulation, and this is a very important point, that if we have all lived our lives again, our daemons collectively know the future. In which case, can our daemons influence the future, our collective future? And I genuinely don't know, because people are asking me, you know, the world has been through a very, very curious period recently. And the question is, you know, what can we learn from this in any way? (0:15:05)

Well, we could learn, for instance, that in generations gone past, but that's the question, isn't it? How can earlier generations know of what happens in the future that's not their lives, if that makes sense? In my first book, I had a section on people who supposedly was able to see the future. (0:15:31)

And in it, I analysed the lives of people like Nostradamus and various other individuals. And what was extraordinary about these individuals were, they were very good at being very precise about future events that took place in their own future lives. (0:15:42)

They were less precise when it came to things that happened after they died. And that made me conclude that we don't really know what happens in the distant future outside of a normal life scale. So the question is, could our distant ancestors do something about global warming? Could they do something about the environment? And then I thought, well, then that's where you bring in the Uberdaemon. This is where you bring in the collective unconscious of everybody. (0:16:22)

And of course, that does know about the past and the future, if that makes sense. Now, of course, Jung used to argue this. I mean, Carl Gustav Jung's argument is that we are tuned into the greater consciousness, sometimes almost dreaming, something like that. And could it be that we just happen to be living in a universe at the moment, or a world that seems to have got it wrong? But who knows, it might get it right. (0:16:44)

One of the things I argue all the time is that the daemons, our daemons, are quite clever. They play the long game. It's as if they're trying to get you from point A to point B. And they know they have to get you there. But it's the route they need to get you there. Because if they've lived their lives many times, they've tried all the other routes. (0:17:08)

And they know the one that will work. But you have to go all through this pain. Because we all learn through experience, don't we? And sometimes we learn through pain and making wrong decisions. And this is what I think the daemon does. The daemon says that Antony has to go through this. Because if he didn't go through this, and I know in my own life, I went through a great period of pain in the mid-1990s. When I did something I shouldn't have done, you know, I hurt somebody terribly. (0:17:35)

But if I'd not done that, I wouldn't have been... I would be living a different life. And I wouldn't have been in the circumstances to write it, lad, or my other books. And it's because of that pain that made me the person I am now. And I think that is what is going on. That we are taking fortuitous routes. (0:17:56)

And I do like to make a final point here. And it's to do with quantum physics. A guy called Richard Feynman, one of the world's greatest quantum physicists of the late 20th century, the guy that discovered the problem with the O-rings and the Challenger disaster. He had something called the sum over histories argument. And he argues that an electron, when it moves from one point to another, follows every single path in an instant. (0:18:22)

It actually follows every possible path it can follow. And by doing so, it discovers the quickest. That is, again, science. Look it up. It's called the sum over histories. Is that what our lives are? Our lives are a sum over histories. (0:18:37)

And I've never mentioned that before. I never thought about that before. So thanks for that, Chad. It's something I had not really thought of before. So the idea is that we follow all the paths. And again, very finally, a very famous short story written by Jorge Borges, an Argentinian magical realist writer, called the Garden of the Forking Paths. Again, read this. (0:19:06)

Again, read that and then read my work. Lots of creative people have known this for centuries. This is not new. I'm not claiming it's new. I'm claiming I'm re-excavating it, as I said earlier on. It's already there. So many stories, so many TV series now are following this kind of pattern. The idea that you go back and you go forward, that you live multiple lives. (0:19:25)

Butterfly Effect is a classic example. Interstellar, as we said before, various other movies. There's so many movies now that are dealing with the themes I'm dealing with. And I believe this is because people are starting to wake up to realise that this is what's taking place. And when we all wake up, well, then it could be interesting, couldn't it? So if you happen to live the perfect life, maybe it takes... I don't know how long, how many lives you would have to live to live the perfect life. (0:19:56)

But what happens at the end of that? You said that some people come back into the simulation, but do you get to choose a different life? Do you get to kind of leave the simulation, not have to come back? Do you have any thoughts on that? Well, A, I don't know, because I can't do the science on it. (0:20:16)

All I can do is speculate. And I really make the point, there's the stuff I do, which is the science, which I can support with science. Then there's the speculation. And this is pure speculation. But I'd like to believe that what happens is after many lives, which again all happens in a split second before you die, that you are given a choice. (0:20:37)

Who decides the choice? I don't know either. But you're given a choice of either moving on, moving on to whatever heaven you believe in. Now get this point again, that I'm building up a model I'm calling the model of reality. And this is that reality and you are in a feedback mechanism, that your reality and the external reality are feeding back all the time and you're creating it and it's creating you. (0:21:00)

Okay, so if your belief system says that when I finally die, I'm going to go to heaven, I'm going to have wings and I'm going to have a harp and I'm going to talk to God. Maybe that's what does happen. Maybe if your belief system is that you get reincarnated as somebody else in the past, maybe that's what happens. (0:21:21)

Because if you're creating in many ways the reality around you, your anticipations of that reality come to pass. (0:21:28)

Now, this is not like the law of attraction. Believe me, it's not. It's much more sophisticated than that. But I'm really coming to the conclusion in my last book, The Hidden Universe, I even argue that ghosts and aliens and jinn and poltergeists, these other intelligences that we interface with, there's a feedback mechanism between us and them. They are created by us. (0:22:01)

They're like tulpas. But we create them and they create us, if that makes sense. And we're all creating each other. We're all part of each other's panorama. And all it is is information swirling around and being processed and reprocessed. And again, this is the work I'm wanting to do at the moment. I'm talking with quite a few researchers at the moment as to how we can quantify this, how we can quantify it scientifically. (0:22:28)

And as my work gets better known, I'm being approached by more and more researchers on this. And I don't think I'll be around long enough to see the research coming to fruition on this. But I genuinely believe that there will be. There's much younger academics now. The older academics find difficulty with my work. The younger academics coming through now really love it. (0:22:49)

Seriously, there's lots of academics in their 20s and 30s who love what I'm talking about. I'm talking about psychologists, I'm talking about neurologists, neurochemists. These guys get it. The old school are dying now. We realise that in the 1990s, a guy called David Chalmers came up with what was called the hard problem of science, the idea of how inanimate matter can create consciousness. (0:23:10)

These are the guys that are now looking into that and saying, come on, we can't pretend this. There's a mystery here, a huge mystery. How am I created out of the interaction of electrons and particles? How? How does that create me, my life? How does it create Chad? There's a huge mystery here. Bootstraps theory, you know, it's a mystery. It's not understood. So we need to break out of this materialist reductionist paradigm, which is brilliant and has done really well for us. (0:23:44)

We wouldn't be able to communicate with each other without materialist reductionist paradigm and materialist reductionist science. But you can't do that with the brain. You can take a car apart and it's bits and pieces. Material reductionism, we reduce it down and you can understand how a car works. You can't do that with consciousness. You can't. It just doesn't work that way. They're completely different things. So we need to start thinking differently. (0:24:06)

And I think it's by listening to the mystics, listening to the people who have extraordinary experiences, and instead of dismissing them and saying, our science can't explain it, therefore it doesn't happen, which is nonsense. You know, there's an old theory that every civilisation thinks that it's science is the pinnacle of explanation. Yeah, like it was in 1895, I think, when Michelson stood up at the University of Chicago and turned around and said he was the guy that did the Michelson-Morley experiment and stood up and turned around and said, there's no reason for science anymore. (0:24:44)

Science in the future is only going to be looking at things to the sixth degree, sixth decimal point. He said there's only one or two dark spectres we don't understand. Those two spectres were the photoelectric effect and the electro... oh, I can't remember what it was now. The dark... I can't remember what it was now. (0:25:04)

Brain's going dead. I'm talking too much. But these two things were subsequently explained in 1900 by Max Planck, which started the quantum revolution, and in 1905 by Einstein, which started the relativity. Quantum means very small. Relativity deals with the very large. Those two theories, by the way, are incompatible. If you use the maths that you apply for quantum physics and you stick in the maths for cosmology and relativity, they don't work. (0:25:33)

So therefore, there is obviously a deeper level of reality where the maths should work for everything. And this is where David Bohm comes in. I just want to, for one second, go back to the daemon. The daemon influences us, tries to keep us making our lives better each time we go through them, correct? So people say that's intuition, but also in your dreams. (0:26:01)

The daemon, you said that's a large part of it for most people, is that the daemon kind of talks to you in your dreams or gives you messages that maybe seep into the subconscious or even your conscious. For me, my whole life, I've always had these time distortions when I sleep. So I used to have an autoimmune condition where I would get very tired. (0:26:25)

I didn't even know it all throughout my life. I would fall asleep in school and I'd fall asleep just real quick, and just for a few seconds, and I'd wake up and I'd have this dream that seemed like things went on for a long time. And I would think, how could that possibly be? Because I was only out of sleep for a few seconds, but it felt like a long time. (0:26:49)

And also, sometimes I have dreams where I feel like there's a whole history behind it, behind whatever I'm dreaming about. There's a whole history of the people, the things, and it's like a feeling. And I just wake up and I don't remember much about the dream, but I have the feeling. And I mean, can you speak on that? Oh, yeah. (0:27:18)

I write extensively about this. It's something that fascinates me. And I wrote a book called The Labyrinth of Time, and I think it was 2010, I think it was now. And I have a whole section on time dilation in dreams. But also what you were saying there, it resonates totally with me, that feeling of you have a dream and you realise you're going back to a place you know. (0:27:36)

You've been there before, you know its geography, you know its layout. And again, I work very closely with people who lucid dream. And I've been working with lucid dreamers for many years now. And I've had one lucid dream myself. I've only experienced one, but it was quite extraordinary. And it's the idea that you know that there's another, almost another version of you that lived a whole life there. (0:28:01)

You know, they've loved, they've had children. And I've had those dreams where I've lived a whole life and you wake up and you have this terrible feeling of loss, you know, that you've lost the people. Now, in that book, I cite many examples from history of this. And one of the examples that I really, really fascinates me was a guy called Alfred Mowry. And Mowry was a psychologist in the 1890s. And when he was a child, he experienced a very, very heavy fever. (0:28:32)

And in the fever, he had a dream and he was involved in the French Revolution. And he was a member of the revolutionary group with Marat and Robespierre and various others. (0:28:41)

And as with the French Revolution, in the dream, he falls foul of Robespierre and he gets a big trial. And in the trial, in the dream, he stands up and he makes a big long speech to defend himself. He's found guilty. He's then taken down and he's taken through the streets of Paris in a tumble up to the Place de la Bastille, where the guillotine was. (0:29:09)

He then stands in front of the guillotine and makes this long speech to the crowds. The crowds cheer and everything else as well. Then he puts his head down to have his head chopped off and something hit him on the back of the neck. And it was the bed board. The bed board had come loose and it had fallen down and hit him on the back of the head. (0:29:28)

Now that intrigued me and it intrigued him for one important reason. A whole dream had been back created to accommodate what happened at the end of the dream. Now think about that for a second. This is extraordinary. His dream went back in time in order to create a whole story to have him being hit by a guillotine. That's why he became a psychologist because he was interested in this time dilation thing. (0:29:55)

The second example is even more extraordinary. There was a hypnotist. I can never quite remember his name. It will come to me in a second. And he hypnotised a young student. And he hypnotised the student and said, right, I hypnotise you and you're going back. And the student found himself in a dream sequence, standing in a field with long grass. (0:30:24)

And he feels hungry. And he walks through the long grass and he hears a child crying. He looks down and he sees a baby lying in a swaddling thing. And he realises the baby's hungry. And he realises the baby's hungry because he's the baby. And then the baby's parents turn up and they pick the baby up and they feed him and they put him in the pram and they take him away. (0:30:52)

The student followed that child right through his life until he was 16. Minute by minute, he lived this kid's whole life and experienced things and guided this kid. He was a daemon, effectively. Then when the kid decides to go to university, suddenly he finds himself waking up and he's in the room. He'd been away for about half an hour in a trance. He'd lived 16 years in a trance situation, witnessing somebody else's life. (0:31:18)

Now, again, if you don't believe me about that story, I give the references in the book. And I'll try and remember the name of the author, but it is in a book written by Aldous Huxley. A lot of people believe that that story was Aldous Huxley himself, but it wasn't. The dates don't mix. And in my new book, I say that the dates don't mix in terms of that. (0:31:38)

But suffice to say, it means that in dream sequences, we're in different worlds, we're in different perceptual fields. And I think your example is a classic there. (0:31:50)

You know, that's... do you lucid dream? Have you lucid dreamed? I've had maybe, yeah, I've had like two or three lucid dreams I can remember in the last five years. I had one where I was actually in the toilet. And I was like in a... I guess I was like in a prison or jail, maybe because I was watching too many prison shows. (0:32:15)

And I was... there were like, you know, like the convicts or a few convicts, and they were just like right there. And I'm like, man, I'm looking and I'm like, I have no privacy. And I'm just like, this has got to be a dream. And one of them said, this ain't no dream, man. And I remember thinking, oh, my God, I can't believe it's real. (0:32:38)

And then when I woke up, and I remember, I remember the dream precisely. And I'm thinking, man, that was so real. Like, I really felt like that was real. So maybe that's not a lucid dream. But it was one of those dreams where you're questioning whether it's real or not in the dream. And then I came to the conclusion in the dream that I thought it was real. (0:33:01)

I think that's the point. It's the point where you become self-aware of the fact of who you are in a dream. As people like Robert Wagoner argues, you know, one of the major researchers in lucid dreaming, you know, we're incredibly stupid when we're in lucid dream states. You know, we see the most ridiculous things, and we never think I'm in a dream. (0:33:20)

And this is what happened to me. My lucid dream was quite strange. By the way, the person, I've remembered the person's name, because I've just written it down while you were talking. It was a guy called Erickson. Okay. That did the stuff. But I was in a nightclub. I used to be a clubber when I was younger, and I found myself in a nightclub. (0:33:34)

This was about 18 months ago, two years ago. And in the dream, I'm in a nightclub, and I come outside the nightclub, and I'm walking down an alleyway. And I think to myself, why am I in a nightclub? And then I felt the duvet around me. And I thought, you're not in a nightclub, you're dreaming. And then for the first time, and the only time in my life, I became aware in the dream. (0:33:56)

And I'm standing there looking down at my hands, and I'm going, what do I do now? And I thought, in dreams, what you can do is you can fly. So I decided to see, I thought, can I fly? So I lifted my legs up, and I fell to the floor, and I actually felt my knees hit the ground. And then I tried it again, and I found myself rising. (0:34:17)

And it was extraordinary. And the thing is with lucid dreams, they're in your mind forever. I can still see this. And then I fly up, and there was a back wall to the alleyway, and I flew over the back wall to see a bay. (0:34:28)

It was a seaside resort, and there were cars and lights. It was late at night, and there were cars and lights driving along. It was real. I could feel the wind around me, and I'm flying, and I'm going, this is absolutely extraordinary. And then I woke up. But that was, I think, the most amazing experience I think I've had, because it made me realise that this reality is no more a dream than that reality. (0:34:57)

And lucid dreaming friends of mine, and I can put you in contact with a number of lucid dreamers that do a lot of work on this. They go back to the same place. They are drawing maps of their world. There's a friend of mine at the moment, Samantha, and she is doing work. She dreams about a place called future Tokyo. And she's walking around in this place, in future Tokyo. And she's met people in future Tokyo that she's met in real life, who recognised her from the dream sequence. (0:35:36)

So what is happening here? So are there levels of consciousness that we can flick within? So it's not just the Bohmian IMAX. It's far more, it's like mirrors. Because, for instance, there's something called false awakenings. And I don't know if you've ever done this. It's happened to me a few times, but the best I've ever heard was somebody that happened eight times. (0:35:59)

So what you're doing is you're lying in bed, and you wake up. And you get up, you go to the bathroom, you clean your teeth, and you wake up again. And you go to the bathroom, you clean your teeth, you go downstairs, and you start having breakfast, and you wake up again. This happened to this guy eight times. (0:36:11)

He got to the middle of the afternoon, and he was in work. And he's with his workmates. And he looks out through the window, and it was a summer's afternoon, and it was dark outside the windows. And he thought, why is it dark outside? And he woke up again. (0:36:27)

And as he said to me, in the message to me, he said, how do I know that that last waking up was into not another dream? And that's so true. Because how do we know we are not dreaming now? What can tell us that we're not dreaming? There's nothing. So is life a dream? And at the end of the dream, you just wake up again, and live your life again. You know, so then it comes back again to cheating the ferryman. (0:36:51)

And the whole idea that everything is perceptual, everything is information, everything is being perceived. Yeah, well, Henry David Thoreau said, you know, in our dreams, you know, basically, it's our truest life. Our truest life is when we are in our dreams awake. That was a quote by Henry David Thoreau. And actually, that's the basis for my next video. (0:37:21)

And I'm talking about that. So it's interesting you're bringing this all up. Can I make one more of the point? (0:37:24)

Sure. Sure, please. This might be interested in this as well, is that I wrote a book on out-of-body experiences. And I have a model I call the intrasomatic and extrasomatic models, whereby I believe that we exist within when we're in out-of-body states, it's kind of brain created, but not. It's again, this kind of a Gregorial model. But I was reminded of something that a number of friends of mine have said take place with them when they are in dream states, when they're in lucid dream states, they're in the body of somebody else. (0:37:59)

Again, Samantha has told me she's in the body of somebody that's not her. And she sometimes catches the reflection of this person in mirrors, and it's not her, it's somebody else. And some of you may be aware of the writings of Robert Monroe, the out-of-the-body guy. And I... That was Tom Campbell's... Tom Campbell worked with him, correct. (0:38:22)

And Monroe, in one of his books, has a concept called either. And when he was in out-of-body states, he would suddenly find himself inside somebody else's body. And there was one classic example of this where Monroe is sleeping and wakes up inside the body of either. Now this either person existed in a totally different world, the cars were slightly different, and the fashions were slightly different. (0:38:45)

And indeed, I'll send you a link that you need to put up on this, is an associate of mine has done a short film based upon the concept of either, based on a village in Croatia, which is really interesting to watch. I'll send you the link. But either, what happened? He found himself in the body of either. (0:39:09)

And he's sitting in his living room, and there's two businessmen sitting opposite him. And behind the businessman is either's wife. Okay. And he realises he's in a business meeting, and he's about to pitch for a business deal. But he doesn't know what the business deal is for. So he starts waffling. Because he's in either's body. And he said he saw his wife in either looking at him going, what's wrong with you? And then he found himself back in bed being himself again. (0:39:38)

Now, if this is a fact, this is intriguing. Because this can explain petty malabsences that people have when they have temporal lobe epilepsy. It can explain almost possession. You know, when people say people are possessed. You know, there's a term in parapsychology, a term called drop-ins. And these are circumstances whereby a medium will be talking, and a spirit will be talking through the medium. (0:40:04)

And then suddenly something else comes in that's completely different. And one classic example of this was a guy called Ingrida Ingridisson, who in about 1904-1905 was a very famous Icelandic medium. And he's doing his normal medium session on a Friday night, I think it was, something like that. And he's talking in voices. And then suddenly this other voice comes in and turns around and says, you need to know this. And everybody's shocked and said, what? (0:40:31)

The voice says, there's a fire. The fire is happening at the moment. And the person asks, and one of the people asked, where? He said, in Copenhagen. In Konigstrasser. In Copenhagen, there is a fire. 15 Konigstrasser. It's on fire. There's fire engines there. It's burning down. (0:40:49)

And then the voice turns around and says, I've got to go now. I'll come back in 20 minutes and give you an update. And the medium then starts talking in his normal way, comes to him and said, did you know what just happened? And the medium said no. They said, well, let's wait a few hours and see what happens. (0:41:06)

A few hours later, he's sitting and suddenly this voice comes back in again. And it says, yeah, the fire brigade have sorted it out now. It's all right now. It's sorted out. Okay. Now, Iceland at that time was part of Denmark. But the only communications, the newspapers only came through on the ships that came through. There was no other form of communication. So they had to wait for two or three days for the newspapers to come through from Copenhagen to discover that there had been a fire in Königstrasser, number 15 Königstrasser. And the fire had taken place exactly as described by the drop-in, exactly as described. (0:41:40)

Now, subsequently, Professor Erlendur Haraldsson, who was a professor who died recently, professor of psychology at the University of Iceland, took himself over to check up on this case. And the drop-in gave a name. I can't remember the name he called himself. But Haraldsson checked up. This was only about four or five years ago. Haraldsson checked up on this. And lo and befold, not only did he find that the man whose name in question existed, but he lived in a flat at number 17, I think it was, Königstrasser, which was exactly the viewpoint that the drop-in was explaining he was seeing. (0:42:27)

Now, that is extraordinary, because that means a living person had communicated with a medium who was, what, 700-800 miles away, and had precisely given information. And not only that, but had gone away and come back again and given information. Now, that to me is one of the most extraordinary cases. It doesn't mean it was a spirit, doesn't mean it was a dead person. (0:42:54)

It was a live person communicating with somebody else. A classic case of telepathy, in my opinion. And I cite that in one of my books. Well, I love when you tell stories like that. It's fascinating. You have a certain way of telling it that really grips the viewer. So I appreciate that. I know we're coming up on towards the end of the time. (0:43:16)

I don't want to take your whole day, but I just had a couple of questions. One is, what is your whole take on the Mandela Effect? Do you think it's real? Is it a psyop? Have you studied it? I mean, how would it play into your theory? Because it's something, I don't know, that I find interesting. I've made a few videos on it. (0:43:30)

So do I. I find it intriguing, because initially, my initial reaction is, I'm quite a skeptic about most things. I don't tend to believe things. And I thought, no, come on, it's bad memory. It's people who are just confusing their memories, you know, until a guy called Jim... Jim Etherett. Oh, God, my brain's gone again. (0:43:56)

But who did one of my interviews that I interviewed recently. And he was saying to me, he said, well, have you heard of the case of Dolly? And I said, no. And he said, do you know the famous James Bond movie where you have jaws? And I said, yes. And he said, do you know the film? And I said, only vaguely. (0:44:16)

He said, do you remember the ending? And I said, yeah, vaguely. And he said, do you remember there's the young girl and jaws goes over to her? And I said, yeah. And I said, she smiles and she's got braces on her teeth like jaws, and they fall in love and they kiss because they've got that link. And he said, do you know that never happened? And I said, nonsense. (0:44:39)

And he said, no, look at the film. And I checked it and it didn't. And everybody I know who knows that movie remembers that scene and it never happened. And it doesn't make sense because that's what brought them together is they both had... Yeah. And I can't, and it completely changed my opinion because, you know, although, you know, my opinion can be changed, you know, by the facts, you know, if it's facts, I'll change my opinion. And I thought, well, is there something more to this? (0:45:10)

And could it be that sometimes we flick within the instantation, within the simulation, and the past changes in some way? And I know of all the other examples, and the other examples are all interesting. You know, like the Coca-Cola sign. I mean, I'm sure that there was a little thing at the bottom. (0:45:38)

And I'm also sure that I remember the guy in Monopoly having a monocle, you know, and I can't prove that, but I just find it. Is it just that we have expectations of things and we then remember the expectations rather than the actuality? And I don't know, but the Mandela effect does intrigue me. I have to say it's something that is one of the few things that I think, hmm, strange. (0:46:04)

Do I believe that the Large Hadron Collider caused it? No, I don't. But it is still strange and peculiar. Right. To me, it just proves or shows that this whole reality is a lot more malleable than people think. Yes. I think that collectively, as I argue in my book, and I'll be working on this in the future, this idea of, as I said, the egregorial reality, is that if we anticipate, if we collectively believe in things, they happen. (0:46:31)

I'll give an example of this. In my last book, I discuss about the Marian apparitions in Fatima in 1917 in Portugal. And there was something happened there extremely strange, where the sun danced in the sky and it came down towards Earth. Now, my mother was a Roman Catholic and she used to cite this case. (0:46:58)

And as a kid, you know, I'm not religious, and I used to turn around and say, oh, for crying out loud, the sun, if I know enough about astronomy, if the sun span in the sky, it just doesn't do that. The Earth would have to have been moving, not the sun. And I dismissed it. (0:47:14)

But I started researching it. And there were about 7000 people witnessed this event. And not only that, but the actual, there were scientists there who witnessed it. (0:47:18)

And it had been raining beforehand, and the rain evaporated. Now, the only thing I can think of was it was a collective hallucination. But that doesn't explain the rain evaporating. You know, you can say that lots of people saw it. And of course, scientists do this all the time, don't they? They have this terminology that they use, that if I see something weird, it's an hallucination, and it's dismissed. (0:47:46)

If you and I see something strange, it's what's called a foliateur, whereby we are collectively influencing ourselves into seeing something that's not there. My counter argument to that was, well, that suggests telepathy, which science also doesn't accept. But they use one thing they don't believe in to dismiss something else they don't believe in even more. (0:48:05)

Okay, so then we get that. And then you get collective hallucinations where thousands of people see things. But our modern science can't explain that. They can't explain it. It's a label. They love giving things labels, better with a nice Latin name or a Greek name, because that gives it... it's like, I don't know, idiomatic epilepsy. (0:48:29)

So somebody will... the doctor will turn around and say, you have idiomatic epilepsy, and sit back as if he's actually solved it. Then you go to the dictionary and check the word idiomatic. And it means from unknown source. In other words, you have epilepsy, and I haven't got a bloody clue what's causing it. And that is how science works. (0:48:50)

They give things labels to confuse us and make us think that they know what they're bloody well talking about, when the fact of the matter is, for most of the time, they don't. You know, they know some things. Going back to my point earlier, that every science believes that it has the answers. (0:49:08)

We will find a new paradigm is on the door. It's going to be dawning soon, where we will make some discoveries scientifically, which will throw out the present paradigm, just as Copernicus and Kepler threw away the Aristotelian worldview of the universe, and the Earth is the centre of the universe. It's going to happen again. And it will happen many times. (0:49:31)

We shouldn't sit back and think that we are the pinnacle of scientific expertise, until we can explain things such as dark matter, until we can explain how 94% of the universe is missing, until we can bring together the maths of quantum physics and cosmology and relativity, until we can explain the placebo effect and the nocebo effect. We don't know. Yeah, I believe there's Will Durant who said, every science begins as philosophy and ends as art. (0:49:57)

But I was gonna say, so we're coming up on time here. We have Zoom set for two hours. So I don't know what happens after two hours. But I wanted, you know, before that happens, can you tell people, you know, the best place to find you? I know you all your books are on Amazon. But if you and if you wanted to talk about a little bit more about your next book, when it's going to come out and, you know, a little bit, well, basically anything you want to mention? (0:50:27)

Absolutely. Okay. If you want to contact me, the best place normally is Facebook. I'm extremely active on Facebook. Just look up Anthony Peake, you'll find me. At the moment, I'm always at my 5000 limits of Facebook friends, but you can still follow. And I've got about 6000 followers that are on there as well. (0:50:47)

So there's about 11,000 people involved in our community at the moment. And it's growing all the time. So join me on there. Also, I now have a comparatively new YouTube channel, which is proving very popular. I have something called the Anthony Peake Consciousness Hour, which goes out once a month, where I have quite top guests. (0:51:09)

Also, I have Incon, which goes out live on Facebook every Monday afternoon at three o'clock, where I have guests. And you can just watch that. That's then recorded and uploaded onto my channel as well. In terms of my website, it's anthonypeake.com. Again, you can get my books in bookshops. You can go and order a bookshop. (0:51:28)

Many bookshops stock my books. Libraries, you'll find the books. I was delighted to discover that the New York City Library has all of my books there as well. So you can find my books in most libraries. If they're not in the library, you can order them. I don't care. I don't mind. I want people to read the books. (0:51:45)

I'm not after the income. I'm after the book, after people getting the ideas across. My books are also available on Kindle, on eBooks generally. Four of my books are now out on Audible, three of whom are me reading them. And one of them is of an actor reading one of the books. (0:52:06)

They're proving extremely popular and people really like that. They seem to like listening to me droning on about my ideas and reading them. So you can check them out on those. Also, you can download a sample of all of those as well on Amazon, if you wish that. What else can I tell you? Yeah, the books, if you want signed copies of my books, they're available off my website, but it's not important because I'm finding these days the cost of sending the books over because it's just the cost. So when is your new book coming out? (0:52:34)

Yep, the new book will be out probably in March of this year. And what it is, is an updating of my first book is The Life After Death, and it's going to be called Cheating the Ferryman. And it will be a complete update of everything I've been discussing today, with all the new science, with all the stuff I've discovered and read about since 2006, when the first book came out. (0:53:00)

I'm delighted with this book. I think it's going to be, it's going to fascinate a lot of people. There's an awful lot of very, very powerful information in there. Again, it starts with the science and takes you through. So I'm delighted about that. Also, my latest book, The Hidden Universe, is also well worth a read. I'm very, very proud of that book. (0:53:24)

Also, just check me out on YouTube. There's tons of material on YouTube. Google me, it's all there. I know you said that your experience is always updating, you're always learning. And so your books show that. But if somebody had never read you before, never read one of your books, would you suggest that they start at the very beginning, your first book? That is the book that has proved the most popular over the years. (0:53:51)

And I think probably the first, but what I would suggest is, if you want to really understand my work, probably read the first book is The Life After Death, and then read The Hidden Universe, which is my latest book, and then get hold of the new book when it comes out. Because I think that really defines what I'm about and what I'm trying to do. (0:54:13)

All I'd stress is, you know, that I'm a searcher like you. I have no special skills, no special anything. I'm just an ordinary guy pursuing his interests. And fortunately, you know, over 100,000 people worldwide, more than 100,000 people have bought my books over the years. And I thank them for that because without the readers, I'm nobody. And without the information that's sent through to me, I'm nobody. (0:54:35)

I want the feedback. We are an international community. You know, it's not me. People are now taking my ideas and writing books on them and everything else as well. It's going forward. (0:54:45)

You know, it's not looking back and it's not the Anthony Peake show. It's far bigger than that. It's the start of something really quite extraordinary and quite special. So please join in. I will try and respond to emails. I try to, but at the moment, I'm inundated. You know, I'm getting 50 or 60 messages a day on Facebook, plus probably 30 or 40 emails. (0:55:10)

And I'm finding it very difficult to keep up with it. But I will try. Please don't think that I'm ignoring your messages. I'm not. It's just I don't earn a great deal for my writing. So therefore I don't have secretaries and people to do it. It's just me. Well, you say you're not special, but I'm sure I speak for others who know of your work that you are. (0:55:31)

You are Anthony. You know, you're a unique individual and you bring something to the world that nobody else can do. So thank you for that. Thank you so much for your time. Thank you, Chad. It's wonderful. Thanks. Thanks again for giving me the opportunity to talk to you. Bye-bye. Bye-bye. Wow, guys, that was quite an interview. (0:55:48)

I think one of the best ever on my channel. And again, if you haven't watched part one, you can watch it right here. Anthony never ceases to amaze me with the things that he says. I hope you guys enjoyed it. And I hope that everybody kind of understood what Anthony's saying. He's saying basically that we live this perpetual Groundhog's Day again and again. (0:56:06)

And I'm curious to know, do you believe more in what Anthony says or do you more in what I talk about and Tom Campbell, in which we live different lives over and over? I'm curious to know. Let me know in the comments section. And guys, please remember to subscribe and click that notification bell. (0:56:21)

So you're alerted to my future content because I wouldn't want to miss you. And if you've noticed, I've been pumping out the content regularly the last few days. This is the third video in three days. And I have another one coming out tomorrow, not an interview, but a regular video. And I think you're really going to enjoy it. And that is because of the people supporting me on Patreon and PayPal. And this enables me to put out that content regularly. So big thank you. If you want to support the channel, links are below. (0:56:44)

And I just want to say another big thank you to everybody who watched this video all the way until the end. I love you guys. And I'll see you all in the next video. Much peace and love. Namaste. (0:56:54)

(2025-01-18)

履歴​

  • (2025-01-19) AI との対話の出だし部分を追加。誤記の訂正。
  • (2025-01-18) 作成。