Advaita, dreams, and the real world
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 кві 2024
- Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @vimohlive
Support the show at / vimoh
Make a one-time donation at vimoh.stck.me/profile
Please read these rules before commenting. Follow them to the best of your ability. The rules are meant to keep the comment space clean and a safe space for anyone who wishes to participate in good faith.
1. No advocating violence of any kind against anyone for any reason. People doing so will get banned from the channel.
2. No praising or abusing any religion for any reason. Proselytising is not appreciated, nor is making generalised statements about the followers of any religion. People doing so will get banned.
3. No casteism, racism, or sexism. Discriminatory language will get you banned too.
4. Trolling, spamming, use of fake accounts to deceive people about your identity, will also get you banned.
This guy was good, and had an upperhand in the conversation
Such a nice and peaceful debate, we rarely see it these days.
Wait for science journey man that man is complete mess. How he debate unknowingly he breaks every rules
Exactly, I also used to watch him and Realist Azad but got fed up of mockery and now I only see Vimoh
You are ex hindu or muslim ?@@rashim
This is how every conversation or debate should be.. respectfull to each other.
You r awesome bro❤
Great conversation. Being an Atheist and having studied Advaita Vedanta much through my 20's I am of the opinion that the caller and Vimoh disagree only on certain nuance of what is "important" in grand scheme of things. Yes, Vimoh's rebuttal of Advaita as philosophical speculation could seem deflationary to caller, but I hope he takes that criticism as valid because even if we grant that awareness is the ground of being, one still has to conduct oneself in the world irrespective of its ontological status_therefore Vimoh's position of practical pragmatic acceptance of "nature of world" has utility. Having said that, the caller is true in stating that Advaita is very rigorous and relies on evidence, but the notions around Advaita and its place in Hinduism have clouded much of people's opinion of it. Probably, using the Western philosophical word of "Idealism" could be more palatable to people or "Analytical Idealism" the way Bernardo Kastrup defines it. All in all, great convo.
Well put. Advaita is roughly equated with idealist monism. It is not, however, quite the same as Berkeley’s subjective idealism.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 Well yea, I agree. I was just mentioning the broad category for larger public.
At times I do wonder if we are all just playing the semantics game. In your framing of "objects of awareness are actually awareness", replace the word "Awareness" with "Material" do we now agree that we are talking about the same thing? Just a thought. I know what people mean by awareness and what people mean by material is drastically different but fundamentally, if we accept monist position do you think it maters what people choose to call it?
@@saitejarangavajjula8200 yes it matters what people choose to call it, because the purpose of language, which is dualistic, is to describe. material implies inert, insentient, unconscious information processing. awareness is subject. the duality of subject-object is only apparent. object is nothing but subject. the reverse, however, is not true. objects do not exist apart from subject. objects are not absolutely existent, they are unreal because they have dependent existence on the subject. but subject does not depend on object. so even if monism is accepted, this doesn't mean one can say subject is nothing but object, because it is not objects that appear as the subject but subject which appears as objects.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 for me. Advaita is a byproduct of imagination of philosophical stupidity😂
@@Maharashtra-e2fwhat does imagination of philosophical stupidity mean? Fact is, people who are philosophically stupid would say Advaita is mere imagination. In that sense, I agree, it is imagination of philosophical stupidity :)
Side note questioner's mandokiya karika is also in this world "which is not real as per questioner😅😅😅"
That's good, you have understood what I was saying. You're correct, mandukya karika is part of the world which is unreal compared to awareness. How is that in any way relevant?
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 For me, it was very difficult to understand your views in this video, coz I have not read much about Advaita😔. But I think you are very close to understand everything!!
The hard problem of Consciousness is what fascinates me.
If cellphones are used to catch the invisible signals around us and convert it into audio during phone calls. Similarly, what do you think in brain, that catches consciousness that is present around us and enables us to feel everything? I am talking about a conscious person and a brain dead person where his most of the organs are working but cannot feel anything.
Somehow the material part of the brain is able to establish a connection with the subtle consciousness around us.
What are your thoughts on this.
@@manojl3388 A brain dead person may not subjectively feel the pin pricks in the waking world hospital, but subjectively he may be dreaming. Phenomenologically, dreaming is not caused by the brain, even though in waking we attribute dreaming to neural activity. This is why in Vedanta they do not say that the brain creates the mind, rather the physical body is separate and the subtle body is separate - this is in fact a more skeptical position than the former, because it simply recognizes something like a mind is experienced in both what you now call waking and in dreams without having to definitively say it is a product of a brain that is only existent within what you now call waking.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 interesting. then at what stage in embryo development, consiousness is formed?
Is it when lots of neuron connections are formed during brain development? Or does it enter the embryo from outside like atman or something, or consciousness was always present in every atom to begin with!!
@@manojl3388 You aren't understanding the drastic paradigm shift of Advaita Vedanta. Atman is no where close to the Christian concept of soul that "enters or leaves a body". Just look around you right now. Everything you see, where does it exist? Does it not exist in the same "space", as it were, where dreams appeared? As the dreamless sleep blankness appeared? That "space" is referred to as consciousness (chit) and existence (sat). If you can conceptualize this, then you can see that any conception of brain, neurons, etc. can only arise in that "space". That "space" is a necessary pre-condition. In Mandukya Upanishad, this "space" is Turiya (the fourth), which is synonymous with both atman and Brahman. They all refer to the same thing. Read the 7th verse of Mandukya upanishad for description of Turiya/Atman/Brahman. Even saying "space" is wrong because both time and space appear in this "space". You can see any attempt to describe it fails.
That was an interesting conversation.
15:04 plus the regularity of the time passing by which we can actually verify but in dream "time" comes by as chunks/piece plus dreams are inconsistence and deregulatory.
Is time real? if there are infinite decimals between 0 and 1 then how time passes from 0 s to 1 s
you can only make claims that dreams are false in the waking state, but you are taking the waking state for granted just as you do when you are in the dream, the logical irregularities and inconsistencies that you are pointing to make complete sense while you are in the dream state.
1. **Understanding Observer and Observed**: The concept that the observer is the observed is a fundamental tenet in certain philosophical and spiritual traditions, including Advaita Vedanta. It suggests that the observer (subject) and the observed (object) are not separate entities but are ultimately unified in consciousness.
2. **Subject-Object Dichotomy**: In conventional perception, there is a distinction made between the observer and the observed. The observer is typically regarded as the entity perceiving or experiencing objects, events, or phenomena external to itself.
3. **Dualistic Framework**: This conventional perspective often operates within a dualistic framework, where the subject and object are seen as distinct entities with separate identities and attributes.
4. **Advaita Vedanta Perspective**: However, Advaita Vedanta proposes a non-dualistic view of reality, asserting that the apparent separation between the observer and the observed is illusory.
5. **Unity of Consciousness**: According to Advaita Vedanta, consciousness (Atman or Brahman) is the underlying reality that permeates all existence. In this view, consciousness is not limited to individual subjects but is universal and all-encompassing.
6. **Illusion of Separation**: The perception of a separate observer and observed arises due to the limitations of the human mind and its tendency to categorize and conceptualize reality based on sensory input and cognitive processes.
7. **Transcending Duality**: Advaita Vedanta teaches methods for transcending dualistic perception through self-inquiry, meditation, and contemplation. By directly experiencing the nature of consciousness, one can realize the unity of the observer and the observed.
8. **Direct Experience**: Through meditative practices and introspection, individuals can access states of consciousness where the boundaries between subject and object dissolve, leading to profound insights into the nature of reality.
9. **Example of Dream Analogy**: An analogy often used in Advaita Vedanta is the dream analogy. In a dream, the dreamer appears to be both the observer (experiencing the dream) and the observed (the contents of the dream). However, upon awakening, the dream is recognized as a projection of the dreamer's own mind.
10. **Consciousness as the Substratum**: Advaita Vedanta asserts that consciousness is the substratum of all phenomena, including the apparent duality of subject and object. Just as all waves are ultimately expressions of the ocean, all manifestations are expressions of consciousness.
11. **Transcendence of Ego**: The realization that the observer is the observed involves transcending the ego or individual identity, which is often associated with the sense of separation and dualistic perception.
12. **Unity in Diversity**: Advaita Vedanta does not negate the diversity of phenomena but emphasizes the underlying unity that pervades diversity. Every object, person, or experience is an expression of the same underlying consciousness.
13. **Implications for Perception**: Understanding that the observer is the observed can lead to a shift in perception, where one recognizes the interconnectedness and interdependence of all phenomena. This realization fosters compassion, empathy, and a sense of oneness with the world.
14. **Scientific Analogy**: In the realm of physics, the observer effect highlights how the act of observation can influence the behavior of subatomic particles. Similarly, in Advaita Vedanta, the act of observation is seen as integral to the creation and perception of reality.
15. **Integration of Knowledge and Experience**: Advaita Vedanta emphasizes the integration of intellectual understanding with direct experiential realization. It encourages individuals to not only grasp the concept intellectually but to directly explore their own consciousness through practice.
16. **Continued Inquiry**: The understanding that the observer is the observed is not merely a theoretical concept but an ongoing process of inquiry and exploration. It invites individuals to continually investigate the nature of their own awareness and the relationship between subjectivity and objectivity.
17. **Freedom from Mental Constructs**: Realizing that the observer is the observed frees one from the limitations of conceptual thinking and conditioned perception. It opens the door to a deeper understanding of reality beyond the confines of language and thought.
18. **Integration with Existential Insights**: Advaita Vedanta teachings align with existential insights regarding the nature of self and reality. By recognizing the unity of the observer and the observed, individuals can find liberation from existential angst and existential questioning.
19. **Harmony with Quantum Physics**: Some interpretations of quantum physics, particularly the observer effect and the notion of interconnectedness, resonate with the Advaita Vedanta perspective. Both suggest that consciousness plays a fundamental role in shaping reality.
20. **Practical Application**: Ultimately, the understanding that the observer is the observed is not merely a philosophical concept but a transformative insight with practical implications for personal growth, spiritual evolution, and the realization of one's true nature as pure consciousness.
The point of an illusive world is that it is not what is out there that is an illusion...the apparent center from which we operate is the illusion...the "I", the actor is the illusion, but it is also a fact that we don't have a well defined way to operate in the world without this I or Ego.
The world is not an independent entity apart from awareness, because you cannot point to the world separately from awareness. If two things are separate, you should be able to point to them separately. For example, a pen and paper are two separate entities. But take gold and a gold ring. You cannot point to a gold ring without also pointing to gold. Just as the gold ring is nothing but gold, the body, mind, ego "I", the world, objects, people, places, things, everything is none other than awareness itself.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 what do you think about j krishnamurti ?
@@Sanskar724 I have not really watched or listened to JK, so though I'm aware of him, can't comment much
@@thebioinformaticsbro785
So I request you to read his book The First and the Last Freedom. And start reading from today itself, there are some interesting things in it for you.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785
And if you want pdf of this book then give me your email id or insta id and I will send you.
Proof of awareness is not just awareness itself, its the effect of awareness on its objects. That's how awareness is verified.
The object of awareness is not awareness itself, it's what the awareness precipitates. Example - the reaction to a stimulus, or an event combined with a existence that consume energy. The reaction might not be same but within a range of acceptable patterns. Since it is us humans who are trying to explore awareness, this range is also defined by us.
Adwait is logical philosophy which can be verified with subjective experience and logic but science is objective to it's core. That's the difference.
If we consider the basic fundamental subatomic particles (being proton,neutron and electron) as chess pieces and the fundamental forces (gravity, strong and weak nuclear, electromagnetic) as the rules of the chess, can we say the current state/form of this universe is due to some “being” playing it? Because even slight change in rules or no of pieces would lead to a different game and the game has to be played in a specific way by the specific rules to come to the present game.
This is not an idea put forth by Advaita, as awareness doesn't do anything but illumine.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 Apologies for the late reply. I absolutely agree with you but this was just a thought process that I had and thought someone could shed some light on it.
It’s fine. I did some research and got to a conclusion.
I feel like as neuro science progresses and we get better understanding of dreams (we have already come a long way even tho its such a subjective topic) all these “so called scientific possibilities” attached to the mystic quality of dreams would fall apart or maybe find even smaller gaps of that knowledge.
And this is where i feel that these speculations become kind of an hindrance to that objective understanding, because we are so convinced that it is something mystical or cant be quantified.
Awareness isn't mystical, it is so ordinary. Advaita is not interested in the mystical, but in ordinary experience.
I had a few questions for you (very curious and not at all about proving or disproving anything):
- you avoided using the term ‘consciousness’ (which most advaitans have done on this channel) and used ‘awareness’ so it doesnt get confusing, but then throughout the video you talk of a ‘dream world’, which vimoh did point out has no qualities of a “world” as we know the definition of the word or experience it. So doesnt it become a very loose analogy on your part?
- throughout the video you claimed it to be scientific and evidence based, however all explanations were analogies at best, poetic even. Just because you accept something is subjective and difficult to prove shouldnt mean that an analogy is sufficient.
- also whats the point? (Really not being rude but i have never understood it) even if all you say is true, its not going to be a matrix style revelation where suddenly you can bend the rules of the world. Why are we complicating simple concepts such as mindfulness? In the beginning vimph does ask you this- what is the necessity?
Its all well to speculate and to talk about different philosophies, but it felt like a big stretch to call it logical based on analogies which were made at a point of time when our realities were so local (they are not so local ever since the internet and the access of information we have now) also when there was no proper knowledge about dreams. (Mentioning these 2 because most of your video was based on that analogy)
Would like to know your answer if possible. Otherwise it was an interesting discussion.
@@RamanSingh-sr6pk
1) You're right the term "consciousness" is often used, but I avoided the term "consciousness" because it has it's own connotations in medicine, as in the statement "going in and out of consciousness". Awareness, to me at least, makes it very clear that we're referring exclusively to the first-person subjective experience that is self-evident. I do agree with you that speaking of a separate waking, dream, and deep sleep world while arguing that there is nothing but a dream makes things confusing. But the point is that there is nothing about this current world where we are talking about right now that distinguishes it from a dream. The fact you may wake up and say "that was all a dream, now this (new reality) is the real world", and that this is a real possibility in theory, may seem like mere speculation, but it is an interesting insight into the nature of reality because even though this waking world may be completely false, the fact that you experienced it is not false, i.e., awareness itself is not false.
2) Looking back on the video, I don't think I spent enough time explaining the idea that one cannot point to things in awareness without pointing to awareness itself. Even people who claim to have seen you slept are able to do so only because they appear in your awareness. I'll try to be more clear about this when I meet with Vimoh next Wed.
EDIT: Additionally, to be clear, I was not using "dream" metaphorically, I was talking about the literal experience of having a dream and seeing people/places/things in the dream. Which analogies did I use that you're referring to?
3) Superficially, the point is the cessation of suffering, attainment of lasting peace -- what would popularly called "liberation". But if you inspect the claim of Advaita that "liberation" is not an event but rather an understanding, a recognition of something that is already true -- that you are not a body/mind in an external world but are the awareness in which everything appears and has a dependent existence on -- then what is really attained is fearlessness (Ashtavakra Gita). Fearlessness about the ups and downs of life, given that it is all nothing but yourself. There is no higher attainment than this knowledge and it solves all problems. One can just sit at home and be happy living even the simplest life. But look at what we see now -- anxiety-ridden people, constantly worrying, panicking, constantly after things thinking it will make them happy, worrying about legacy, etc., what Sam Harris would call "lost in thought".
Thank you for replying with such patience!
I know you didn’t mean the dreams metaphorically, but when you compare the properties of the dream state with what we know as waling reality, you are making an analogy. In the video itself, vimoh gave a lot of examples where it becomes clear that comparing dreams to reality (as we know it) is comparing apples and oranges.
It feels like saying “just because A happens, B could also in the end found to be A”.
And to your last point, it boils down to trying to live that ideal life, to be free from suffering and take life as it comes to you. To each his own. Nothing wrong in trying to find that philosophy that works for you. But it feels weird when you have to claim its scientific to believe in it. (And this is my question to everybody who calims their philosophy is scientific) if it is scientific, why arent you actively delving into experiments and research on it? Or trying to gather data on it? And why always reffering to old books and manuscripts for every question? Like even if a scientific research is quoted in such matters, it is always a stretch to interpret that data to fit what the manuscript says (which is poetic).
@@RamanSingh-sr6pk I was trying to get at this in the beginning of the conversation, but Advaita IS science, but the difference is that because the only proof of awareness is awareness itself, it is subjective science. Subjective meaning exclusive to first-person experience. Though it is subjective, we can still make objective claims about subjective experiences. The laboratory is each individual's own conscious experience. I'm not sure about the other philosophies you're referring to, but to my knowledge, this certainly makes Advaita Vedanta (and related concepts in Buddhism - the differences are in fact superficial) unique. Sam Harris explains this beautifully in an article titled "Sam Harris's Vanishing Self" published in the New York Times -- Google and give it a read, I'm unable to share it here because apparently UA-cam removes comments with links.
This was a very healthy, calm and sensible conversation. 👏👏👏 No one is raising their voice and trying to understand what the other person is saying. This type of debate we need. 🤌
@Vimoh Here's a food for thought
-Is the observer and observed different?
-Is the observer and observed same?
-Does the observer's observation, describe more about the subject or the object?
Suppose one could get a live stream of one's visual cortex working by putting a camera in one's skull while he/she is watching the stream what is more real the content of the live stream or the watching that is happening inside the visual cortex?
[1/2] It's situational and relative. Depending on the claim we go for independent assessment and sometimes need collective verification supplemented by evidence.
1. Lets suppose you observe your wall clock and it says 2 PM afternoon. Your observation is true to you and subjective but you don’t feel the need the feel to double check with someone.
2. 30 min later you feel something is off and ask your friend to make the same observation. The friend also sees the wall clock and declares 2:30 afternoon. You get independent assessment this time and you are not dependant on your own observation. This gives you more confidence that u r right.
3. Again 30 min later, you feel the time on wall clock does not match with the daylight outside. So you check the time on your phone which shows 7PM evening. Now there is a big difference here as wallclock is showing 3PM afternoon.
4. You and your friend decided to investigate and found that the wall clock is faulty due to discharged battery and showing incorrect time of 3PM.
[2/2] Conclusion -
1. You can rely on your individual observation, provided they are useful to you.
2. If need be you can take collective observations to increase your confidence in ur observation.(in science we call it peer-review)
3. Whatever observation you make at any of the above stage in analogy, reality may or may not differ. You can only increase your confidence level by using more observations and data points.
4. End goal here is for your observation to be as close to reality as possible.
In your analogy of visual cortex, both scenarios are equal as they observe same reality. You watching the live stream directly and you watching live stream thru visual cortex from someones elses brain. If there is any difference between the reality in the 2 , then investigation is required thru scientific method as stated earlier based on observation, experiment, peer review etc
@@happyguy6501. **Understanding Observer and Observed**: The concept that the observer is the observed is a fundamental tenet in certain philosophical and spiritual traditions, including Advaita Vedanta. It suggests that the observer (subject) and the observed (object) are not separate entities but are ultimately unified in consciousness.
2. **Subject-Object Dichotomy**: In conventional perception, there is a distinction made between the observer and the observed. The observer is typically regarded as the entity perceiving or experiencing objects, events, or phenomena external to itself.
3. **Dualistic Framework**: This conventional perspective often operates within a dualistic framework, where the subject and object are seen as distinct entities with separate identities and attributes.
4. **Advaita Vedanta Perspective**: However, Advaita Vedanta proposes a non-dualistic view of reality, asserting that the apparent separation between the observer and the observed is illusory.
5. **Unity of Consciousness**: According to Advaita Vedanta, consciousness (Atman or Brahman) is the underlying reality that permeates all existence. In this view, consciousness is not limited to individual subjects but is universal and all-encompassing.
6. **Illusion of Separation**: The perception of a separate observer and observed arises due to the limitations of the human mind and its tendency to categorize and conceptualize reality based on sensory input and cognitive processes.
7. **Transcending Duality**: Advaita Vedanta teaches methods for transcending dualistic perception through self-inquiry, meditation, and contemplation. By directly experiencing the nature of consciousness, one can realize the unity of the observer and the observed.
8. **Direct Experience**: Through meditative practices and introspection, individuals can access states of consciousness where the boundaries between subject and object dissolve, leading to profound insights into the nature of reality.
9. **Example of Dream Analogy**: An analogy often used in Advaita Vedanta is the dream analogy. In a dream, the dreamer appears to be both the observer (experiencing the dream) and the observed (the contents of the dream). However, upon awakening, the dream is recognized as a projection of the dreamer's own mind.
10. **Consciousness as the Substratum**: Advaita Vedanta asserts that consciousness is the substratum of all phenomena, including the apparent duality of subject and object. Just as all waves are ultimately expressions of the ocean, all manifestations are expressions of consciousness.
11. **Transcendence of Ego**: The realization that the observer is the observed involves transcending the ego or individual identity, which is often associated with the sense of separation and dualistic perception.
12. **Unity in Diversity**: Advaita Vedanta does not negate the diversity of phenomena but emphasizes the underlying unity that pervades diversity. Every object, person, or experience is an expression of the same underlying consciousness.
13. **Implications for Perception**: Understanding that the observer is the observed can lead to a shift in perception, where one recognizes the interconnectedness and interdependence of all phenomena. This realization fosters compassion, empathy, and a sense of oneness with the world.
14. **Scientific Analogy**: In the realm of physics, the observer effect highlights how the act of observation can influence the behavior of subatomic particles. Similarly, in Advaita Vedanta, the act of observation is seen as integral to the creation and perception of reality.
15. **Integration of Knowledge and Experience**: Advaita Vedanta emphasizes the integration of intellectual understanding with direct experiential realization. It encourages individuals to not only grasp the concept intellectually but to directly explore their own consciousness through practice.
16. **Continued Inquiry**: The understanding that the observer is the observed is not merely a theoretical concept but an ongoing process of inquiry and exploration. It invites individuals to continually investigate the nature of their own awareness and the relationship between subjectivity and objectivity.
17. **Freedom from Mental Constructs**: Realizing that the observer is the observed frees one from the limitations of conceptual thinking and conditioned perception. It opens the door to a deeper understanding of reality beyond the confines of language and thought.
18. **Integration with Existential Insights**: Advaita Vedanta teachings align with existential insights regarding the nature of self and reality. By recognizing the unity of the observer and the observed, individuals can find liberation from existential angst and existential questioning.
19. **Harmony with Quantum Physics**: Some interpretations of quantum physics, particularly the observer effect and the notion of interconnectedness, resonate with the Advaita Vedanta perspective. Both suggest that consciousness plays a fundamental role in shaping reality.
20. **Practical Application**: Ultimately, the understanding that the observer is the observed is not merely a philosophical concept but a transformative insight with practical implications for personal growth, spiritual evolution, and the realization of one's true nature as pure consciousness.
If you have an infant in your family or in the vicinity, (preferably younger than 2yrs old) try having a communication with them and observe if they're actually communicating something or just making random incoherent rumblings. I'm not saying that there's something to observe there, but it might not be nothing either.
Hey vimoh, how do you define love.
Is following spirituality is wrong from the perspective of an atheist?
Is everything which exists have a materialistic proof??
I want your help to make my opinion on advait vedant and atheism...
Because I'm a 16 yrs old boy trying to understand atheism...
Pls clarify this one and don't ignore it...
You cannot prove anything exists except existence itself
You should discuss krishnamurthi and david boom understanding of science and religion
Hey vimoh, pls have a interview with acharya Prashant pls
He is a Solipsist.
Who is a solipsist?
@@udhayveersingh1855 One who concludes that since he/she cannot verify other's consciousness', he/she is the only 'real' entity in the universe.
@@No-I-dont-want-that Solipsism follows Ockham's razor -- it's simpler to claim "only I am conscious", something that is self-evident, rather than develop a complex theory about why others are actually conscious and we're living in a shared reality -- something that is contradicting by the disappearance of the waking world when we go to sleep.
In Advaita, a concept similar to solipsism is "ekajivavada". However, solipsism claims that one's own mind, including the ego "I" is real, whereas Advaita says even that is not real because it disappears in deep sleep. The only reality is awareness to which waking, dream, deep sleep seemingly appear.
@vimoh You're so unusually polite here, despite "bio" going round and round about his inconsistent statements. Do you think this would have been a shorter video, had bio not had his accent? Or is it because he's a member? 😂
I think there was a bit of a communication gap, and I also had a bit of jitters as it was my first time doing anything like this. I'll be back next Wed to clear some things up.
Hey what's your view on Osho's work
I do think he was a jivanmukta. His take on realization makes sense: one does not get an answer to “who am I?” But instead the question stops being asked.
@@thebioinformaticsbro7851. **Understanding Observer and Observed**: The concept that the observer is the observed is a fundamental tenet in certain philosophical and spiritual traditions, including Advaita Vedanta. It suggests that the observer (subject) and the observed (object) are not separate entities but are ultimately unified in consciousness.
2. **Subject-Object Dichotomy**: In conventional perception, there is a distinction made between the observer and the observed. The observer is typically regarded as the entity perceiving or experiencing objects, events, or phenomena external to itself.
3. **Dualistic Framework**: This conventional perspective often operates within a dualistic framework, where the subject and object are seen as distinct entities with separate identities and attributes.
4. **Advaita Vedanta Perspective**: However, Advaita Vedanta proposes a non-dualistic view of reality, asserting that the apparent separation between the observer and the observed is illusory.
5. **Unity of Consciousness**: According to Advaita Vedanta, consciousness (Atman or Brahman) is the underlying reality that permeates all existence. In this view, consciousness is not limited to individual subjects but is universal and all-encompassing.
6. **Illusion of Separation**: The perception of a separate observer and observed arises due to the limitations of the human mind and its tendency to categorize and conceptualize reality based on sensory input and cognitive processes.
7. **Transcending Duality**: Advaita Vedanta teaches methods for transcending dualistic perception through self-inquiry, meditation, and contemplation. By directly experiencing the nature of consciousness, one can realize the unity of the observer and the observed.
8. **Direct Experience**: Through meditative practices and introspection, individuals can access states of consciousness where the boundaries between subject and object dissolve, leading to profound insights into the nature of reality.
9. **Example of Dream Analogy**: An analogy often used in Advaita Vedanta is the dream analogy. In a dream, the dreamer appears to be both the observer (experiencing the dream) and the observed (the contents of the dream). However, upon awakening, the dream is recognized as a projection of the dreamer's own mind.
10. **Consciousness as the Substratum**: Advaita Vedanta asserts that consciousness is the substratum of all phenomena, including the apparent duality of subject and object. Just as all waves are ultimately expressions of the ocean, all manifestations are expressions of consciousness.
11. **Transcendence of Ego**: The realization that the observer is the observed involves transcending the ego or individual identity, which is often associated with the sense of separation and dualistic perception.
12. **Unity in Diversity**: Advaita Vedanta does not negate the diversity of phenomena but emphasizes the underlying unity that pervades diversity. Every object, person, or experience is an expression of the same underlying consciousness.
13. **Implications for Perception**: Understanding that the observer is the observed can lead to a shift in perception, where one recognizes the interconnectedness and interdependence of all phenomena. This realization fosters compassion, empathy, and a sense of oneness with the world.
14. **Scientific Analogy**: In the realm of physics, the observer effect highlights how the act of observation can influence the behavior of subatomic particles. Similarly, in Advaita Vedanta, the act of observation is seen as integral to the creation and perception of reality.
15. **Integration of Knowledge and Experience**: Advaita Vedanta emphasizes the integration of intellectual understanding with direct experiential realization. It encourages individuals to not only grasp the concept intellectually but to directly explore their own consciousness through practice.
16. **Continued Inquiry**: The understanding that the observer is the observed is not merely a theoretical concept but an ongoing process of inquiry and exploration. It invites individuals to continually investigate the nature of their own awareness and the relationship between subjectivity and objectivity.
17. **Freedom from Mental Constructs**: Realizing that the observer is the observed frees one from the limitations of conceptual thinking and conditioned perception. It opens the door to a deeper understanding of reality beyond the confines of language and thought.
18. **Integration with Existential Insights**: Advaita Vedanta teachings align with existential insights regarding the nature of self and reality. By recognizing the unity of the observer and the observed, individuals can find liberation from existential angst and existential questioning.
19. **Harmony with Quantum Physics**: Some interpretations of quantum physics, particularly the observer effect and the notion of interconnectedness, resonate with the Advaita Vedanta perspective. Both suggest that consciousness plays a fundamental role in shaping reality.
20. **Practical Application**: Ultimately, the understanding that the observer is the observed is not merely a philosophical concept but a transformative insight with practical implications for personal growth, spiritual evolution, and the realization of one's true nature as pure consciousness.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785he rose above from the physical experiments
what do you think about Nastik book written by Kushal Mehra
Is it out yet? Amazon says it will be released on the 27th of April.
He has to ride his Hindu fanatic audience and support their political ideology. From the blurb he has given us, it is easily a political book that argues for a religious, traditional and patriarchal morality. You might be better off reading a textbook giving an introduction to Eastern Philosophy,than the slow and weakly argued ramblings of a conservative propagandist.
@@thomascromwell6840I still don't get why he is so uppity about about accepting that India had a sect which was atheistic. Nothing wrong in it. Vimoh should accept that. Plus a man's religious views need not be coinciding with his political views.
@@alfredo12419 can you tell me where Vimoh denied this? He has major hicup with declaring that the sect you are speaking is 'Hindu' and Hindus of those times accepted it.
@@dragoons292010 Hindu just doesn't mean someone who follows hinduism, it could also refer to someone's cultural ( like celebrating festivals) or ethnic( used to) identity. Tomorrow if people stop believing in the concept of ethnicities in India ( wouldn't happen) Vimoh can't say I am just an Indian not an Odiya Indian.
@@alfredo12419 Hinduism is seen as a belief system that forms an essential part of one's (religious) identity. Ethnicity does not have coded rituals or scriptures associated with it, maybe some customs yes, but it's different from religion. For example Brahmins from Kashmir and Bengal have same religion but different ethnicities.
Its beautifull how a westerner is defending an eastern idea and an indian is defending western idea.
True globalization of ideas.
I agree. Though, materialism was traditionally the viewpoint of the Nyaya School of indian philosophy. So, it is also an idea found in the east. In his work Khandana Khanda Khadya (sweets of refutation) advaita philosopher Sriharsha refutes the Nyaya arguments.
Literally nothing there in the video is 'Western Idea'.
@@sumitkumar-gs2nc yes because your ego told you that yea?
@@andreamessiasgomes7118 whatever west has, east already have that
@@rashidrazakhan9153 exactly 🤣 but some people think west got it from east but reality is everyone more or less did it same time and that is the spirituality. Lame it is especially when Indians think they were the first to come up with spirituality and doing rituals n all, and then they taught it to the world 😑. What made you tag me btw my response to that other guy id because he was trying to say otherwise so i responded cause such egoistic response will come from such people only.
Who is the other person you are talking and what's his qualification/ knowledge about advait?
I'm the person he was talking to. Been learning Advaita for past 6-7 years, starting with Chinmaya Mission's online courses, moving to different prakarana granthas (Vivekachudamani, Atma Bodha, etc.), Drg Drishya Viveka, and for past year been studying Mandukya Karika.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 Hey bro, advait should be discussed with only those who have started to feel "Adhyatmik dukh" otherwise leave him where he/she is.....don't u think so
@@a_man_jaiswal yes ur right but Main reason i came on is to prove advaita is evidenced based and intellectually rigorous, since Vimoh said in a diff video advaita cannot be verified because its claim is “one mind experiencing all of it”. However in reality this is not the final conclusion
@thebioinformaticsbro785 I am a future physicist, and I am really amazed by statement you made about our identity and experiences are dependent on continuous memory, it's exactly what physicist struggle with explaining consciousness, I will check out advita vedanta in future 👌
@@user-fx1mm7wf5z The key takeaway of Advaita is the primacy of consciousness - it cannot be explained as an emergent phenomenon of insentient information processing, but is rather the fundamental being in which information processing takes place.
We may not prove objectivity simply by first person analysis but we may arrive at objectivity through inter-subjective interaction
Any inter-subjective interaction is indistinguishable from dream, and can only happen within awareness. Inter-subjectivity interaction therefore does not prove existence outside of awareness.
real world is primary 👍, unknowingly you make great quotes
Great conversation.
IMO, What Vimoh said to define science, was definition of 'Practical'. As not everything in science may be tangible. We may need to apply logical reasoning.
For e.g in Physics we have theorisists which establish something which can not be seen/ verified in practical. Einstein established the theory of relativity, black hole and many more things in theory by equations. Even now we can not do practical or tests for those. So don't these things fall under science
Who is the person on the other end of the line? Why not say something about him? I am curious to know more about him, seems to be an interesting person
I don't understand people, they sometimes spiral into something so much they start believing in something that doesn't make sense.
I'll try to clarify when I meet Vimoh next Wed. Remember what we've set out to prove though -- that things do not exist outside of awareness. Does this even need proving? Can you know something that doesn't exist in awareness? Where else could it exist? Even the people who claim that they saw you sleeping exist in awareness, so that is no proof.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 you clearly spelt it out yourself… “can you know” the query of knowledge position will have to be subject to awareness of multiple things like human beings and mics and cameras… even when person dies, or goes into a coma, the world ceases to exist FOR THEM. hence you couldn’t rely on them for this query of knowledge due to their faulty awareness or or lack thereof.. your argument or whatever view about Advaita Vedanta is just a mundanely sophistication of simulation theory. What if we are all are living in a simulation/dream? It’s unfalsifiable, much like a dragon claim or the claim about the super God or a unicorn and therefore warrants no scientific labour…
@@beactivebehappy9894 Sure, but you are misunderstanding one thing. The ultimate claim of Advaita is not that we are in a simulation. Rather, the possibility that we are is an interesting insight into what is (or is not, in this case, the world) ultimately real. Awareness is the only reality -- Vimoh agreed that waking, dream, and deep sleep all come and go, but he remains and experienced all of them. But I didn't quite make the connection for him.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785basically it's gaslighting people into having doubts about reality. 😂
@@thebioinformaticsbro785in my opinion it's a perversion of Buddhist philosophy and techniques.
So Buddha talks about a method to achieve mental tranquility in the world and it is to keep your awareness on the breath. When awareness is focused on one thing you forget about your pain, sickness,fears all of us have experienced it and we can train to focus our awareness. We can be happy in sadness or sad in happiness depending upon where our awareness is. It's practical it deals with our mental state, our feelings.
When it's taken literally we get Advaita. It's a philosophical lasagna with no practical application.
The real world is not dependent on our awareness a tumour can grow whether anyone is aware of it or not however our mental state is indeed dependent on our awareness, if we are not aware of crimes happening in neighbourhood we won't feel unsafe we can also feel unsafe in safest of places depending on where our awareness is it could be a past experience,a phobia, a dream.
A pickpocket won't receive 2 mobiles from my pocket if there as only 1 whether he was aware of it or not. He might also get things that I was not aware of and neither was he even a monkey would get same content from my pocket.
So my knowledge my mental state is dependent on my awareness but reality is not dependent on awareness 😊
Western guy tried his best. But a discussion with Advaita expert "Swami Sarvapriyananda" would be great idea to dive deeper into this subject.
Aadi Shankaracharya's guru gorpada was Buddhist.
People claim this because he uses phrases like "Alata", referring to the firebrand analogy commonly used in Buddhism. This can be attributed to the fact that his main goal was to communicate his ideas and understanding to people in his time, and that "Alata" was a popular phrase to use in that philosophical community in those times. But if you read his Mandukya Karika, he repeatedly mentions "this is the essence of Vedanta", clearly indicating he is a Vedantin. Furthermore, the Mandukya Upanishad, which his Karika (verses) are written on, pre-dates Buddhism.
1. **Understanding Observer and Observed**: The concept that the observer is the observed is a fundamental tenet in certain philosophical and spiritual traditions, including Advaita Vedanta. It suggests that the observer (subject) and the observed (object) are not separate entities but are ultimately unified in consciousness.
2. **Subject-Object Dichotomy**: In conventional perception, there is a distinction made between the observer and the observed. The observer is typically regarded as the entity perceiving or experiencing objects, events, or phenomena external to itself.
3. **Dualistic Framework**: This conventional perspective often operates within a dualistic framework, where the subject and object are seen as distinct entities with separate identities and attributes.
4. **Advaita Vedanta Perspective**: However, Advaita Vedanta proposes a non-dualistic view of reality, asserting that the apparent separation between the observer and the observed is illusory.
5. **Unity of Consciousness**: According to Advaita Vedanta, consciousness (Atman or Brahman) is the underlying reality that permeates all existence. In this view, consciousness is not limited to individual subjects but is universal and all-encompassing.
6. **Illusion of Separation**: The perception of a separate observer and observed arises due to the limitations of the human mind and its tendency to categorize and conceptualize reality based on sensory input and cognitive processes.
7. **Transcending Duality**: Advaita Vedanta teaches methods for transcending dualistic perception through self-inquiry, meditation, and contemplation. By directly experiencing the nature of consciousness, one can realize the unity of the observer and the observed.
8. **Direct Experience**: Through meditative practices and introspection, individuals can access states of consciousness where the boundaries between subject and object dissolve, leading to profound insights into the nature of reality.
9. **Example of Dream Analogy**: An analogy often used in Advaita Vedanta is the dream analogy. In a dream, the dreamer appears to be both the observer (experiencing the dream) and the observed (the contents of the dream). However, upon awakening, the dream is recognized as a projection of the dreamer's own mind.
10. **Consciousness as the Substratum**: Advaita Vedanta asserts that consciousness is the substratum of all phenomena, including the apparent duality of subject and object. Just as all waves are ultimately expressions of the ocean, all manifestations are expressions of consciousness.
11. **Transcendence of Ego**: The realization that the observer is the observed involves transcending the ego or individual identity, which is often associated with the sense of separation and dualistic perception.
12. **Unity in Diversity**: Advaita Vedanta does not negate the diversity of phenomena but emphasizes the underlying unity that pervades diversity. Every object, person, or experience is an expression of the same underlying consciousness.
13. **Implications for Perception**: Understanding that the observer is the observed can lead to a shift in perception, where one recognizes the interconnectedness and interdependence of all phenomena. This realization fosters compassion, empathy, and a sense of oneness with the world.
14. **Scientific Analogy**: In the realm of physics, the observer effect highlights how the act of observation can influence the behavior of subatomic particles. Similarly, in Advaita Vedanta, the act of observation is seen as integral to the creation and perception of reality.
15. **Integration of Knowledge and Experience**: Advaita Vedanta emphasizes the integration of intellectual understanding with direct experiential realization. It encourages individuals to not only grasp the concept intellectually but to directly explore their own consciousness through practice.
16. **Continued Inquiry**: The understanding that the observer is the observed is not merely a theoretical concept but an ongoing process of inquiry and exploration. It invites individuals to continually investigate the nature of their own awareness and the relationship between subjectivity and objectivity.
17. **Freedom from Mental Constructs**: Realizing that the observer is the observed frees one from the limitations of conceptual thinking and conditioned perception. It opens the door to a deeper understanding of reality beyond the confines of language and thought.
18. **Integration with Existential Insights**: Advaita Vedanta teachings align with existential insights regarding the nature of self and reality. By recognizing the unity of the observer and the observed, individuals can find liberation from existential angst and existential questioning.
19. **Harmony with Quantum Physics**: Some interpretations of quantum physics, particularly the observer effect and the notion of interconnectedness, resonate with the Advaita Vedanta perspective. Both suggest that consciousness plays a fundamental role in shaping reality.
20. **Practical Application**: Ultimately, the understanding that the observer is the observed is not merely a philosophical concept but a transformative insight with practical implications for personal growth, spiritual evolution, and the realization of one's true nature as pure consciousness.
If this world is " dream world".....
What is the real world....
You the awareness are real.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 ?????what are you saying man???
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 can you Define awareness????
@@yadhukrishnanvk9493 That to which the waking, dream, and deep sleep conditions come and go. That which experiences all 3. To you, for all intents and purposes, awareness = existence. A statement like "that chair over there exists" is equivalent to saying "that chair appears in my awareness". Awareness is the space, as it were, where anything that is experienced -- objects, people, thoughts -- appears. Therefore, the waking world appears in the same "space" (awareness) as the dream and deep sleep nothingness appear. That awareness is a pointer to Brahman which you are. EDIT: this is why Brahman is often defined as sat-chit-ananda (sat = existence, chit=consciousness/awareness).That awareness is not the ego "I" because the ego disappears in deep sleep, and the ego is an object of awareness just as a table or chair is an object of awareness.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 it is also can be Brahmin is also a illusion... means Brahmin doesn't exist.....
In simple words: put Advaita vedanta in Brahmina's case also ,
Brahma is also a character of another entity's dream world,by doing this you will be in a loop.....
And i think this is another problem of this philosophy....
What is your educational qualification?
You are Grandmaster
12:30 sir that's the climax of advait
You were asleep and you don't know then youll ask to others who were observing it
But that's too a trust thing they can lie that's very superficial answer
Its trust thing the ultimate witness is the experiencer and isn't it awat from you it's actually the truth
For example my name is Divyanshu
Divyanshu is just a tool for the experiencer to experience everything where ut csn store its memory
What is the consequence of advait?
@@spuriusscapula4829 if any consequence is reached how will it be a learning process
Though through advait you can get a base to observe yourself perfectly through which you can reach conclusion
This is the beauty the day when you acknowledge that yes there's nothing in world through which I can get my eternal peace (eternal means even throughout life) that day is your enlightenment
And when you start learning in this process you become better version of yourself each day 😉
Upanihsds aren't god's voice they are just voices that seek you question that may shake your bases of foundation now buddha gave some solutions and even Upanishads give some solutions
But at last it's you are you trying to find answer just by reviewing your daily actions
Upanishads is like question book and B GEETA AND Ashtavakra geeta is a solution book
You may agree or disagree with the solution
If you disagree then atleast find yours
@@spuriusscapula4829liberation from ego, living life as a witness
Vimoh please make videos on debunk on religions false claims like his god do this and that
Watch the channel
Watch he's both channels
Hey, Vimoh i am an Agnostic, and i am afraid to be an Atheist. If God exists he may punish me for being an Atheist. Moreover whenever i try to convince myself that there is no God, everything in my life starts getting bad. ;(
you are not aware of the world is real the tatvajnana 🙏by shree madhvacharya
The world can be dismissed as not independently existent simply because it is perceived (drishyatvat) and disappears in sleep (anityatvat). This is why Gaudapada in Karika lists all other vedanta schools as well as vedanga schools (like astrology) and says all those are dealing with what is seen (drishyatvat), which has dependent existence on the seer and is unreal compared to seer, the seer is the higher reality
Hey 🙏
The bhava is not transferred as perfect in our own language as the wolrds etimological language Sanskrit and western is not possible to clarify vedanta. 🙏
So tatvajnana is not for debating on others like this it is inner debate with ourself as atmanivedana we are in the presentance the world is karmabhumi we only get knowledge in this earth now... We want reality with experience the inner bliss of wisdom of god the ananda until the end the death of body..not the jeeva.... We want exact reality of presentence not the future..
Every person in world aware of day sleep and dream... Dream is not depend upon jeeva it is projection of sarvasamartha the god not a jeeva can preplan for every dream and we have present and we have to calculate according to reality with their own experience...
Vedas are apaurisheya not created by anyone we go throug individualy and study with deep.. My opinion is first preority for truth i am experienced bliss of tatvajnana with my own lif experience no need to clarify myself to world is real or not..
🙏🙏🙏 ethartha jnana with bhakti to the god is the truth to know the reality..... 🙏
@@shree_purushottama. bhakthi to God is practice of Advaita to Advaitin -- Vedantins, i.e., Jnana Yogins who study and meditate on Upanishads as sadhana (spiritual practice) have no qualm with bhakthas whose preference is different, but to Advaitin, the overwhelming love of God day in and day out and seeing everything as God is not different than Vedantic meditation on mahavakyas in essence and will ultimately lead to non-duality with dissolution of the mind in God
Exactly the thing is atma the jeeva is smaller than atom we cant see in this eye we can feel the atma the jnanananda swaroopa having their own astitva with their own nature the swabhava is the aswatantra and limited at everthing and it is controlled by the supreme energy it can be experienced by upanishats with ethartha jnana with our pure mind first clear the mind and then go through simple hearted not as advaitian🙏
I am not a advaitian nor dvaita... I am experienced in my own life nothing can proved with only words with pollute minds i experience duailty with the god and not become a god and.. The jeeva swabhava and jnana and ananda and omnipotent and omnipresent cannot be created its the nature of god not the jeeva its should only first swaroopa sakshatkara and then bhagavat sakshatkara it not be created it is only experience...
Vimoh please work on your background and video quality and all those things that fetch views. I know that you are above those superficial things but your content needs to reach more people, and unfortunately those things matters for people to get attracted to a channel.
While i may not be able to give a evidence that i am 'not' living in a dream or in a matrix, i will nevertheless, continue to live my life as if it is real unless someone gives an evidence otherwise.
Advaita does not claim that the world is non-existent (asat), but it is mithya (apparently existent), as in the example of mistaking a rope to be a snake. The snake never existed.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 My original comment still remains. While i can mistake a rope to be a snake in the dark, in the real world, i know how to differentiate between the two.
@@happyguy650 In the real world, you would mistake a rope to be a snake in the dark, yes. There is also no snake apart from the rope, the snake was nothing but the rope. If you say in real life there does exist a separate thing as a snake and a rope, this is where the analogy breaks down and the gold/gold ring analogy works better. You cannot point to anything in awareness apart from awareness, just like you cannot point to a ring (made of gold) apart from gold. If they were separate, you should be able to point to the ring and gold separately. Just like the ring is an appearance of the gold and has no separate reality apart from the gold, the ego "I", body/mind, world of objects/people/places/things is an appearance of awareness and has no separate existence apart from awareness. Just like the ring can in no way said to be "born" but is instead "un-born" (a-jata), everything from ego "I" to all things in the world are unborn (a-jata) and not absolutely existent.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 I cannot prove consciousness exists without using my conscious part of my brain, cannot prove logic exists without using logic but I presuppose they exist because they work and give us accurate results in real world.
So In a world, where fact cannot be distinguished from fiction, dream from reality, snake from a rope whatever analogy you want to use, there is no escape, hence I would live my life presupposing they are real (even if I’m in a matrix) unless someone (like Morpheus) comes and proves me wrong (but with evidence and not with philosophy)
@@thebioinformaticsbro785can you point to a cobra without pointing to a snake?? We have nouns adjectives to differentiate between things why use this limitation to push forward Advaita.
The reason snake rope example is given because your awareness can be mistaken in identifying reality. 😊
When you are atheist .How you manage a happy relationship with your family, friends. ??
Same way you do
@@vimohlive it is very complex because realationship me emotion aa jate h . So it is logic vs emotion
Then very diffecult because family and friends me to religious log to honge na
@@Krishnakantdahiyahow emotions are based on God?
@@Krishnakantdahiya Emotion ka religion ke saath kya lena dena hai? You can have emotional relationships without religious.
@@adityachopade5265 not with god but with who believes in god
I think a more important question is, what leads people to such philosophical ideas over practical pragmatism, even when involved in professions which require one to take the real world absolutely seriously. And how then do such people reconcile their two minds. I see no utility of advaita or such philosophical enquiries except as a fun timepass or maybe in trauma healing for some, which again, I believe, renders one more passive than doing them much benefit in the "real world" where most of their traumas actually come from. At the heart of it, is it simply escapism? Or there's more?
What's your view on this Vimoh?
Advaita is highly practical. It is the endpoint of all religion. The outcome is fearlessness (and love for everything else as yourself) that everything is the same as you the awareness, there are no “others”.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 that presupposes others as a cause of fear. If you need an overarching philosophy to convince yourself to love others, it just highlights a deeper issue within your psyche as an individual.
@@wizapollo Not at all, because this a love of others far more profound than a basic emotional love. Love in the basic sense of being kind to others, charity, volunteering for welfare of humanity, etc. are pre-requisites to become a student of Advaita, not the end goal.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 I don't think there's a religion on the planet that doesn't preach those same ideas. These are commonplace ideas of humanity. So, how is Advaita any different or useful? This also brings me back to my main point: I don't see it as beneficial in a practical sense. It seems that people who struggle to cope with real-world problems often turn to such ideologies. That's why religions remain popular even in the 21st century.
@@wizapollo Advaita is beyond religion, it is first-person science. It does not rely on faith, it relies on pure reason and empirical verification.
And on practicality. Either you have a quest to know Advaita, or you don’t. I cannot give the desire to know yourself to you. The desire to know “who am I?” is asked by one who was highly successful in life and after realising the fuitlity, asks “is there nothing more?”. Not everyone realizes the futility. That is why traditionally, the knowledge was taken not given, and Advaitins do not proselytize. To one who does not have that quest, it seems like pure philosophy with no practical use. For one who does, everything else becomes secondary, and knowing oneself by meditating on what was understood becomes the goal of life.
EDIT: "that presupposes others as a cause of fear." very shallow interpretation of the word "fear". Fear here means fear of risks, fear of speaking out against unrightousness, etc. On a deeper level, fear refers to suffering of any kind: worry, anxiety, always wanting more, etc.
EDIT2: Also I'm not sure you read my last message carefully. What other religions preach (service to humanity, etc.) are pre-requisites to Advaita, that is not what the subject matter of Advaita is.
He is a medical student. Does he not understand the mechanism of dreams and how it works ?
So his queation is like a game developer saying he cant say whether VICE CITY is the real world or non-gaming world is the real world.
Can you prove the brain creates dreams? All we can do is correlate brain activities with reports of subjective experience. But the only proof of the subjective experience of dreaming is the subjective experience of dreaming.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785
Oh wait ! We had interacted before ! I thought it was you!
I dont know enough to proove that brain is creator of dream. But I can confidently say brain, more specificly hippocampus is necessary to dream. A surgical procedure can stop dreams - that is the proof that physical brain is necessary for dream. You can chemically change the way you dream by medication. Again proof that dreams are influenced by waking world things - which is what you would expect if dreams are indeed imaginary images presented by brain while asleep. On the other hand, there is no way a dream can change how a waking world is going to be- waking world is always consistent in how it works. One can also say that dreams are affected by things that happen in waking world- reinforcing the hypothesis that dreams are not real but created by brain
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 I am not in the medical field. I would like a clarification from you instead, since you are. Is there no research into origin of dream in brain ? Have you searched for it ?
@@shardsofice How can you say physical brain is necessary for dream when dream vs waking cannot even be distinguished, and it's possible this waking is in fact a dream? See the important thing is that its a possibility.
@@shardsofice The way its understood is that the most vivid dreams occur during Rapid Eye Movement (REM) sleep. Researchers can monitor brain activity using fMRI, PET, and EEG and correlate these with patient reports upon being awakened out of REM sleep. The main study linking REM sleep to dreaming showed that a higher percentage of patients reported dreaming when awakened during REM sleep.
Why the F is this happening in my 'dream' then ?
Sir, India needs more people like you . 🎉
Like selflessness concept in Buddhism, ofcourse, advaitan will not openly accept selflessness. However, He said, "object of awareness depends upon awareness". If its goes like that, then that awareness also depends upon his own previous awareness. If it goesblike that then their main concept of Braman or universal consciousness also get deconstructed. It is actually a de-construction of self, which is selflessness.
Chitamantra is one of higher Bhuddhist school in Bhuddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Tradition, later higher Bhuddhist schools academically attack chitamantra school because many of chitamantra ideas goes against reasons and common sense. Advaita is nothing but a same to same copy from Chitamantra school only with different names as source consciousness called Braman, in place of creator. RIP
Awareness is never an object, and is self-evident. By its very nature, it doesn't depend on anything else for its existence, because it is existence itself. Advaita is from Mandukya Upanishad which pre-dates all of Buddhism. In Mandukya Upanishad verse 7, we find the Turiya, which is your true Self, described as "shantam (peaceful), shivam (that which can only be described as not-this, not-this as it is never an object), and advaitam (non-dual)".
@@thebioinformaticsbro785What is the ultimate purpose of awareness or Brahman. Why does it experience the dream world? Or why does it experience this world that we consider as real? What is the purpose of any Brahman experiencing all this?
@@ISHWERRAY This question has been asked many times and I am toying with it myself. Remember, Advaita is deconstruction of the notion of separate "awareness" and "objects of awareness". Awareness doesn't experience the world because it is not separate from the world and there is nothing apart from awareness. Everything you see and have ever seen is nothing but you the awareness. Experience requires duality. Causality depends on time, and time is an appearance within awareness. Therefore to ask "what is the cause for this appearance" would imply a before and after, which is a construct of time, which is a construct within awareness, i.e. an object of awareness. Non-duality is literally beyond experience and beyond language. This is why liberation cannot be something that is gained, but only recognized. It is ever-available, even at this very moment. The real you is already liberated, but we keep insisting that we are a limited body/mind in an outside world.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 what is the ultimate purpose of all these things or all these activity that occurs within the brahma. in other words what is the ultimate purpose of the brahma.?
What is the purpose of the existence of the dream world or the unreal world within Brahman?
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 what is the ultimate purpose of all these things or all these activity that occurs within the brahma. in other words what is the ultimate purpose of the brahma ?
What is the purpose of the existence of the dream world or the unreal world within Brahman?
This is maya all the Things
Vimoh you were very patient with the caller who was clearly a privileged stuffy liberal conservative fellow who are the kind who think starving people are choosing to starve.
I think we were both patient with each other, I don’t see the need to attack. What’s a liberal conservative? And for the record, I think starving people should do everything they can to not starve, and we should do everything we can to help them.
Materialist fails to transcend sufferings ,this is why there is the need for advaitya.
Advaitians also suffer
@vimohlive i am not saying advaitians dont get diseases or any other worldy pains but they know the reality ,they can disidentify themselves from sensations pleasure or pain with actively taking part in worldy affairs without being worried or restless .They know that these things are as real as the waves apart from water which is here true unchanging self ,the pure consciousness.He knows it very well that he is not these pains or sensation only to whom,the witness consciousness these things appear . There are numerous example of people who are like these,i can specially tell you about a monk who was paralysed in both legs and blind but yet he was as happy as any other person on earth could be , he was always active in serving other people .
@@imjayantasanyal Yes exactly -- when one is convinced materialism is a dead-end, that is the beginning of studying Advaita. Sages like Ramana Maharshi transcended suffering --- that is the evidence transcending suffering is possible. Intellectual understanding of Upanishads is only the first step. Sadhaks (seekers) with intellectual understanding but who have not yet had direct knowledge of Reality and who are not jivanmukthas would still suffer --- in this context Vimoh is right --- as suffering is the nature of duality. Realization and abidance in the non-dual Reality alone leads to transcendence of suffering (dukha-nivritti).
@@vimohlive is there any person in the world who said "now I dont want anything" after achieving a certain thing but jivanmukt's like mirabai,ramana maharishi etc..they said such quote..mirabai's famous quote "अब कछु नाथ ना चाही मोरे" now I dont want or desire for anything my lord,I am completely satisfied...now tell me is there any materialistic person who said such thing??
@@SriRadhey_you don't have a much deep knowledge of it neighter I have
I just wanna clarify the that after reaching this point there's a time it's not like enlightenment and that's pseudoscience
Enlightenment is a never ending process that little by little your sufferings come to end every day you feel more better than yesterday
The only mool mantra of advait is that the World is maya doesn't means it has no physical significance it just means that this world cannot provide you with what you actually want
Where were you before birth ??
You didn't even existed to let you think where were you same after death you will not remain to think that where are you
As simple as that
Brain is too materialistic it's just consciousness that makes it functional
Ok, this discussion was useless because Adwait is way deeper to be debated in this format. Vimoh need to read the Kartika. Apart from that also it is useless to discuss because they are completely different subjects. They both are on different planes, so they will never cut each other in absolute sense.
I wouldn't say it was useless because in one video Vimoh claimed Advaita is "one mind, one mind only". Whereas hopefully viewers here saw that Advaita is even more skeptical than the materialist position. Materialist position sounds like an Advaitan what Christianity sounds like to an atheist - like the Christian defends the reality of God with no proof, the materialist is unable to prove the reality of what we call the real world.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 When he said he is ok with a limited interpretation of reality it sounded like a religious person.
Anyway sorry to call it useless. I didn't know the past discussions. My point was just to express that Adwait is a vast subject and it is hard to debate when the other side has never even heard of Mandukya Kartika. In that sense, I appreciate your efforts. 👍
Admire this Bio dude for really mastering the art of "gish gallop". It is as if Jordan Peterson and Jaggi Vasudev had a love child.
hahaha I'll try to avoid that next time!
This guy never heard of Lucid Dreaming.
I do mention lucid dreaming in the video. But it's still within the framework of the dream, and does not prove the existence of the waking world when one is in the dream.
just hold his nose and mouth close he will find out he is in dream world or in real😅😅
You don't get it brother.
Advaita state that our reality is our reality but can be other's dream and our dream can be other's reality.
If you have killed someone in your reality you really killed someone in reality but this may be someone's dream but for you it's reality.
Just think you are dreaming where a person die and his family is crying. So why they are crying it's only a dream! But for them who are crying in dream is all the thing is reality.
So assume if we are in someone's dream but we are feeling everything because it's our reality .and that's adavaita told that word is nothing but a dream of conciousness (parbhrama) , world is illusion but for us it's reality but if we find that world is nothing but illusion we can be free or get moksha.
Suppose I have made an ai game where games character have there own intelligence and they are free to certain extent to do mainy things.
The character wil feel that they are real as they have some conciousness, information and all but are they real for me??
They are not.
Again Advaita is only a philosophy a d philosophy provide a base for science and research.
So I'm not saying that certainly the world is an illusion or Dream but I'm saying world can be illusion as Advaita state but there are other philosophy too.
Now it's own science to verify the philosophies.
Everything in science and research start with a philosophy and ends with a conclusion or a result and that's all.
@@HarshKeshari-ul4ehyou also don’t get it bro, Advaita is not mere philosophy but already proven. Anything that is perceived has a dependent existence on the perceiver. The perceiver alone is real, not the perceived.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785
I agree the perceiver alone is real not perceived.
But aatma is perceiver and a common people who don't have a deep knowledge of philosophy especially Advaita vedant philosophy will not get what I'm saying so I have simplified.
And I don't think that Advaita is proven philosophy as our Rishis and mantra drista already have told that everyone have to prove or find the truth by himself and all the philosophy and rituals can be helpfull. A person have to find the ultimate truth/ conciousness himself. So we have to prove Advaita philosophy for ourselves as our Rishis find looking inward.
And there are many scientific method described by our rishis to know the ultimate truth , one may follow gyanmarga, bhaktimarga, karmmarga to find the truth .
So I don't think anything is proven we have to prove the things for our own not for some pseudo libral or to prove or to get certificate from athiest
What this dude said sounded very deep, but actually was just a very fancy word Salad. He couldn't establish what is real and what's not. When we establish a reality, it's only then that we can compare something to it to say that that's not 'real'. That groundedness is not there in his argument. It's just philosophy. That's it. Woo-woo bullcrap conjured out of thin air by some ancient philosopher.
You're right, I didn't spend enough time explicitly establishing that awareness alone is real -- I just said waking, dream, deep sleep are all unreal and they come and go to the same awareness. I'll make it more clear when I meet with Vimoh on Wed.
EDIT: If you pay close attention to 8:30, I ask Vimoh "does awareness ever stop" and his reply was "no it doesn't". That's it right there.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 when he was talking about relying on other people's opinions you could have pointed out the fact that they are also using consciousness to know, and hence consciousness is primary.
@@viktorvaughn1079 Hmm, that they are using consciousness to know would be within the framework of pratibimba-vada (assuming others are also conscious), which I find is less simple of an explanation than ekajiva-vada (solipsism), which is already the present experience. Since I was approaching my argumentation from ekajiva-vada, I didn't mention that. But what I COULD have mentioned from ekajiva-vada was the fact that in order for other people to say to you that "oh yes, you were sleeping", they must first appear in awareness. But yes you're absolutely right, since Vimoh was insisting more towards the pratibimba side and that's how the conversation was going, your point would've been perfect to mention there.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 concepts like ekajiva vada and ajati vada can be hard to digest for people new to advaita.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 Thanks for more word salad. Even these latest comments don't mean anything.
Sleep and awake that was claimed. So which state is awake and whwn do you sleep. This philosophical argument doesn't have any impact on the Reality whatsoever.
"So which state is awake and whwn do you sleep" that's a great question.
If dream and real are same .. then dreaming about having accident & loosing a arm would hv been same in real world
Nope. Because if you lose arm in waking, it is possible to have both arms in dream. Also not saying they’re same, but that one is not more real than other compared to awareness that knows both.
Speculative opinion of Vimoh -
@vimoh - how do you know you are real, I mean apart from you is there any other proof that you and your world is real ?
Vimoh the body/mind is not real, but the awareness illumining his subjective experience is.
What is the ultimate purpose of awareness or Brahman. Why does it experience the dream world? Or why does it experience this world that we consider as real? What is the purpose of any Brahman experiencing all this?
There is no purpose because there is no world, dream or not, in reality. Right here and right now, this is Brahman (sarvam iyetad brahma, ayam atma brahma - all this is brahman, this self is brahman). Was a gold ring anything but gold at any time? Can you point to gold ring without pointing to gold? Similarly, is all of this anything but awareness? Can you point to anything here without pointing to awareness?
What is the ultimate purpose of the existence of Brahman?
@@ISHWERRAYYou the brahman are the quality of existence itself, the substratum, so even the phrase “Brahman exists” is redundant.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 what is the purpose of this existence. Or what is the purpose of the brahman.
What is the purpose of having the illusion of this unreal world inside Brahman?
Vimoh, how do you know that this waking world is not a dream, and real world is when you wake up from this waking world
Because the waking world is consistent and the dream world is not
@@vimohlive i think i did not made my point clear, this world could be a dream and you are having dreams in it. I mean dream in a dream and you are yet to truly wakeup.
@@kanavdawra Come to the live stream and we can talk about it
@@vimohlive There is not one dream world, each dream can be considered its own world, and within that world, there is consistency ("mother has always looked like this", etc.). And to @kanavdawra, there is no real world when waking up from this world, any world experienced is unreal because anything that is seen or perceived is unreal compared to the subject.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 I know there is know world when we truly wake up, i was just trying to make a point to Vimoh, who seemed to had miss understood my position. I think you have good understanding of Advaita, Are you listening to Mundaka?
Freethinkers of Arabia & Persia :
1) Ibn al-Rawandi:
Ibn al-Rawandi, born in the late 9th century CE in the region of Khorasan (present-day Iran), was a prominent Persian philosopher and skeptic known for his critical stance towards religious beliefs and his advocacy for rationalism and empiricism. He lived during a period of intellectual ferment in the Eastern Islamic lands, where philosophical inquiry and debates about religion were prevalent.
**Philosophical Contributions:**
Ibn al-Rawandi was a vocal critic of traditional religious theology and jurisprudence. He argued against the existence of a deity and challenged religious doctrines, particularly those based on revelation and authority. He advocated for a rationalist approach to philosophy and theology, emphasizing the importance of empirical observation and critical thinking.
**Works:**
Ibn al-Rawandi's major works include "The Refutation of Revealed Religions" and "The Folly of Faith," in which he systematically critiques the foundations of religious belief and argues for a naturalistic worldview. His writings were influential in shaping later debates about religion and philosophy in the Eastern Islamic lands.
**Legacy:**
Ibn al-Rawandi's skepticism and rationalism were controversial in his time and continue to be debated by scholars today. While he faced criticism and opposition from religious authorities, his ideas paved the way for later philosophers and intellectuals to engage critically with religious beliefs and to explore alternative perspectives on philosophy and theology.
2) Abu Bakr al-Razi:
Abu Bakr al-Razi, also known as Rhazes, was a Persian polymath who lived in the 9th and 10th centuries CE. He was one of the most renowned scholars of his time, making significant contributions to various fields, including medicine, philosophy, and alchemy.
**Contributions to Medicine:**
Al-Razi made groundbreaking contributions to medicine and pharmacology. He wrote numerous medical treatises, including the famous "Kitab al-Hawi" (The Comprehensive Book), which became a standard reference in medieval Europe. Al-Razi emphasized the importance of empirical observation and clinical experience in medical practice, laying the foundation for modern evidence-based medicine.
**Philosophical Views:**
In addition to his medical works, al-Razi was also a philosopher who engaged in debates about religion and metaphysics. He expressed skepticism towards religious dogma and orthodox theology, advocating for a rationalist approach to understanding the world. Al-Razi's philosophical views were influenced by Greek rationalism and Persian intellectual traditions.
**Legacy:**
Al-Razi's works had a profound impact on both Eastern and Western intellectual traditions. His contributions to medicine laid the groundwork for the development of modern medical science, while his philosophical writings challenged prevailing religious beliefs and encouraged critical inquiry. He is remembered as one of the greatest polymaths of the Eastern lands.
3) Abu 'l-Ala al-Ma'arri:
Abu 'l-Ala al-Ma'arri was a blind Arab philosopher, poet, and writer born in the city of Ma'arra in present-day Syria in the late 10th century CE. He is known for his critical views on religion, his advocacy for rationalism and humanism, and his mastery of Arabic poetry.
**Philosophical Views:**
Al-Ma'arri's philosophical views were characterized by skepticism towards religious dogma and organized religion. He questioned the existence of an afterlife, criticized religious rituals and superstitions, and advocated for ethical living based on human reason rather than divine commandments. Al-Ma'arri's rationalism and humanism were reflected in his poetry and prose, where he expressed compassion for humanity and a commitment to intellectual inquiry.
**Literary Works:**
Al-Ma'arri was also a prolific poet and writer, known for his mastery of classical Arabic poetry. His poetry often addressed themes of mortality, morality, and the human condition, reflecting his philosophical outlook and critical perspective on religion. His most famous work is "The Epistle of Forgiveness," a poetic and philosophical dialogue between the living and the dead.
**Legacy:**
Al-Ma'arri's critical views on religion and his advocacy for rationalism and humanism have inspired generations of thinkers and writers in the Eastern lands and beyond. While he faced criticism and persecution for his beliefs during his lifetime, his works continue to be studied and celebrated for their intellectual depth and moral insight.
In conclusion, Ibn al-Rawandi, Abu Bakr al-Razi, and Abu 'l-Ala al-Ma'arri were influential figures in the history of thought in the Eastern lands, each contributing in their own way to the advancement of philosophy, science, and literature. Their critical views on religion, their advocacy for rationalism and empiricism, and their commitment to intellectual inquiry have left a lasting legacy that continues to inspire scholars and thinkers today.
----------
Therefore, Don't expect 100% of humans on earth to have a high brain capabilities for deep thinking, logical thinking, good general knowledge, good IQ, investigative skills, inquisitiveness and creativity.
98% of the world's population lacks these elements.. They may physically look like adults, but they are still young children with small underdeveloped brains and they are sheep that simply follows the herd and are incapable to break free from their chains of ignorance.
There will emerge only a handful of people from this group who would possess the capability to think outside their religio-spiritual-cultural boxes. Moreover for someone to be like that, it requires a special type of brainwiring, conditioning from childhood experiences while growing up and other influences.
💥
🍇🧠🍇
💥
Likewise, for people to be attracted to religion or become convinced about silly and shallow religio-spiritual systems, their brains too, should be wired in a certain special common way. All such people lack brain qualities and intellectual elements of those people who are able to creatively think outside the religio-spiritual-cultural boxes.
🙈
🐒🧠🐒
🙉
Atleast this angrez was better than Indian advaita supporters that came on your live
Hah, we have our own Matt Dillahunty. I believe the laws of awareness are connected with YT algorithm. Thank you Sir. This is educational.
Acharya Prashant sir has better and clear explanation of existence.
He has no clarity between objects and concepts he always talk that atma includes all. but problem here is atma is concept how concepts include the physical thingns ?.We will not get the answer of this question by him because according to him atma is that which is beyond our imagination but again he definitely say you that atma includes all.
@@sachinrathod277why they say atman is beyond because we now don't know about the truth and when we say there is truth is here and where that place so consciousness is finding that truth but remember consciousness does not know the truth and that is finding somewhere except knowing himself thats why gurus say the truth is beyond so you have to understand yourself first then all answers are getting closed that is I'm one
@@sachinrathod277I'm telling you just a book's concept one means understand what I'm that find the truth, means I'm a truth and I'm real. And why the advait tells us the world is an illusion because consciousness is finding the truth in the world and gurus know the truth is consciousness you have to understand himself that why they tell us the world is illusion and blah blah .
Dreams are created by your unconscious brain. It's similar to writing a fictional story, where the characters are a product of you. They can't be conscious on their own.
"Dreams are created by your unconscious brain" is precisely what we've set out to prove. My point is that can't be proven. If you say monitors or any measurement in the waking world, that still wouldn't prove it, because you do not know for sure anyone dreams but yourself.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 aren't questions like these really questions for neuroscience to fill the gaps in on rather than for philosophy?
@@spuriusscapula4829 Neuroscience can only correlate physiological measurements to patient subjective reports, which are conceptually irreducible. I.e., the only way to prove subjective experience is subjective experience itself. Furthermore, neuroscience is an object of awareness and restricted to the waking world. Check out the article "Sam Harris's Vanishing Self".
@@spuriusscapula4829 No, because awareness is conceptually irreducible. Neuroscience cannot prove the existence of subjective experience, because as an objective science, it is ever-limited to simply making correlations between physiological measurements and reports of subjective experience.
@@thebioinformaticsbro785 Why not? Isn't every "subjective experience" just a consequence of our neurons being a certain way, structured in a certain way, and firing a certain way?
I do not think this guy understands what is meant by "dream", some use it as a metaphor to describe something in mind but that is not to say it is solipsism and not to say it depends on my mind alone or yours alone etc.
The thought, I would assume, is that the materialist and idealist can agree on so much, the claim of what reality is is "mind-stuff". So the use of "dream" is a useful metaphor but people assume to much baggage to go along with it like it not existing when I wake up.
Oddly, his definition of scientific method needing to be "observable, describable, peer reviewed and the conclusion needing to be accepted by multiple sources", would fit many metaphysical views that accept consciousness as real.
So, I do not see where the refutation here is, unless you can give me some points
@vimoh theists think that fine tuning supports god buyt they. Don't realise fine tuning destroys god entirely because if this universe is finely tuned then no intelligent god cannot interpret the life inside universe because splitting ocean into half and levitation is impossible due to the so called finely tuned universe. Thus instantly all of their heaven hell miracles outside universe outside dimensions crashes. Intelligent god forgot that he accidentally made physics which he cannot violate himself 😂.... This makes me believe that god doesn't exist at all......
Advaita does not require belief in God. In fact Mandukya Karika makes one atheist.
everything you are talking about is what the world taught you ever since you had taken birth so if you’re really curious or anything you should be questioning every single thing that you learnt from this world because you didn’t create language you didn’t create theorems you didn’t create any of it yet you’re so sure about all that stuff and negating and different perspective or point of view do you know a way where you clean everything from your mind and I mean everything and just start a fresh ? Like there is just nothing to define in your head now you start from the beginning and look at things and self enquire about every single things the fact is simple we are pre conditioned to believe certain things and that affects the way we perceive reality that’s why a cow has a different perception than you do and in Advaita Vedanta that’s what called illusion they are not saying the world doesn’t exist they are saying the world exists the way it does in your mind because of how you perceive it you can never know world in its absolute sense and Vedanta is all about dissolution of ego it doesn’t talk about material objectively it talks about material subjectively it specifically mentions that there is study of outside and there is study of the subject that is seeing the outside and it is to do with you. With all you so called atheists you all have pre conceived ideas and you already have your bias about philosophical stuff that since so called physicists don’t talk about it it is all crap and it happens because you have already given yourself a label “atheist” so now you’re an atheist and you will do certain things you will believe certain things you will reject certain things how’s that scientific? I don’t understand because you people are not even scientists some of you probably don’t have any background in science some of you probably failed in science but you claim to be Internet scientists do you know the “real scientists” like Erwin Schrödinger Heisenberg Bohr etc and many quantum physicists read all these texts not because it had anything to do with their theories that’s a different subject I am just saying they also knew the reality is very subjective and now there is so much you can find in the objective material world I am not claiming that truth of the material world is in vedas that’s stupid I am saying you as a person is human being first and you have your problems just like every human that took birth so these scriptures are helpful to know your inner self it’s not mystical it’s simple daily life stuff just observing your thoughts and choices can tell a lot about yourself and that’s all advaita Vedanta teaches it’s self enquiry I can go on and on but I hope you all understand my point of you’re an avid reader read everything and leave your biases
Unless this guy Vimoh studies advaita, it's futile to talk to him. It is a your waste of time. You have a good understanding Bio. To claim it's speculative, one has to have a thorough knowledge of it. Without knowing how can one say that. That is pure ignorance and arrogance.
Hehe you’re right, but I get a kick out of challenging myself to see if I can convince him in limited time. Also, I think Vimoh is just being honest. I enjoyed my conversation with him. People who are the hardest to convince would, in the end, be the strongest proponents.
If u become atheist after religious then u can be logical, lekin agar nastik hone k baad aastik ho jaate to tark ki aisi ki taisi.
Vimoh, you need to familiarise yourself with Sam Harris's content on spirituality.