Ignorance is like a 'partition' in computer science. You can take 1 harddrive (with all the knowlege on it) and partition it into segments, such that each segment has no access to the whole. Thus, ignorance is a power of Brahman, which it uses to create smaller expierences than it's complete self, as the whole. Why? Boredom, exploration, love. Within infinity is all possible knowledge, and partitions of that knowledge.
This is not an explanation or even a functional analogy. All it does is say ignorance is somehow a positive capability without explaining in what way. Can Brahman will itself into non-existence?
@@nanashi7779 Brahman IS existence, by definition. Non-existence is anti- to Brahman, sort of like anti-matter to matter. Also, Brahman, by definition of advaita vedanta is singular (non-dual), so it cannot be assumed to have a dual state of existence AND non-existence. Besides, who says Brahman has "will"? So what you posit is not a reasonable scenario, you are just putting up an anti- prefix to all that is Brahman (Sat-Chit-Ananda), and asking Brahman to will itself to be Asat, Achit and Nananda. This is just a non-question, similar to asking whether you can be non-you. Can you be non-you?
All the possible attempts of addressing the cause of IGNORANCE will only lead to PARADOX! SILENCE is the only EFFECTIVE answer for the fundamental question of Ignorance!? In SILENCE ignorance melts away....
🙏🙏🙏 Pranam Maharaj Jai Shree Ramakrishna " Avidyaayaa: Avidyaathvam Idham-eva thu lakshanam Yath Pramaana-asahishnuthvam Anyathaa Vasthu Saa Bhaveth " -- [ Brihadaranyakavarthika , 181 ] The definition of Avidya or ' Ignorance'(not-knowing) is that 'its ever not knowable '... itself. It can never be known or defined through any ' means of knowledge ' (pramana).... Or else , it would be Real (Vasthu).
The problem of existential or fundemental ignorance is a very important matter for every spiritual tradition. According to great teachers of humankind to live in ignorance means living in a "dark cave of the bondage" (Plato), under the tyrany of sins and death (Jesus), in the vicious circle of suffering (Gautam Buddha). According especially existentialist philosophers the living in ignorance means to live in forgetfulness about your mortality and the absence of any meaning of life. As a summary the ignorance means to live in the condition of selfdeception and slavery.
Dear Swani, enlightened beings don't need to search for source of their ignorance because they become the whole. Remembering Self is source of this magic.
From consciousness arises name and form and from name and form arises consciousness and with the cessation of consciousness is the cessation of name and form and vise versa.
18:35 Lord Shiva coming in our dreams cannot be considered as unreal/maya or part of a dream. He is the paramaatma, the ultimate reality and absolute consciousness. If he visits then it's not considered maya. Its a reality because he is not binded by maya like us sentient beings. He is the brahman who CREATED maya. P.S whether u call this brahman krishna/shiva/maa durga it's one and the same. No difference एकम सत विप्रा बहुधा वदन्ति
@@riteshsenpai6572 Adi Shakaracharya of Advaita Vedanta considered him as Paramaatma as Parameshwara and didn't have any problem worshipping him, writing so many hymns for him and taking his NAME. He was a great devotee.
@@riteshsenpai6572 He's not just SOMEONE. The video you're replying on currently is of Swami Sarvapriyananda who is a Vedantic Monk and whose Guru is the Indian Philosopher and teacher of Advaita Vedanta- Adi Shakaracharya 🙏🏻 who founded the concept of non dualism. So if that SOMEONE is worshipping Lord Shiva or Lord Krishna then I think they know what they are doing. So let's pay our respects to these wise gurus and try to follow their words and their paths 🙏🏻
@@thekindmystic I really respect them. And it's their path. I do not have any problem with them but your statement. So I was just correcting you. Lord Shiva , Lord Krishna are Deities. They have their work to do. They are like workers in the kingdom of Paramatma. 🙏
At first see who are you. The answer is Atman/Brahman. Realise yourself as the Self. Then see does the Self have ignorance about itself? The answer is no. Then why you bother asking the question? Also, Brahman has taken form of the mind. The purpose of the mind is to be ignorant ar first then do spiritual sadhana then to become enlightened. Therefore, don't worry with the question.
These answers are nothing less than Bhasyas and Upanishads catering to the modern inquirer who is nothing less in the history of Advaita inquiry. Several statements made by Swamiji hit something inside directly. Here is my understanding to this question. Ignorance is not a “thing”. For e.g. A woman becomes a mother only in relation to a child. Brahman becomes “Ignorance” only in relation to an Ignorant person. A deeper inquiry will reveal there is no “thing” or no “body” called a person. Similar to, "if there is no child, there is no mother"- Where "there is no ignorant person, there is no ignorance". Maha Maya is nothing but Brahman itself. She is not in Brahman. She is Brahman. She is an activity of Brahman.
The best answer is in Gaurapadas dream theory...that sleep n dream....the awaken state is also dream state,now the ignorance of the person in the dream don't matter anything to the person who is awakened....
11:39 - but Swamiji, considering German, or for that matter, any language to be born out of idea, having no existential significance. Isn't learning the language, then, is actually covering oneself with a veil of ignorance? Making "efforts" to learn a system of knowledge with its roots in ideation that exploits or uses the reasoning capabilities of human brain?
Delicious lecture ❤ However: the chicken and the egg “paradox” is not a singular reasoning issue but a lack of information revealed/asked in the question.
the talk is very nice. however this may be overthinking much simpler comcepts . much of verses in upanishads may have much simpler and straightforward answers. "ignorance is a potential side effect of any perception " may be a much simpler , concise way to represnt this idea . why pull Brahman into this whole discussion ?
Absurd answer. Ashrayanupapatti: What is the locus or support of Maya? Where does Avidya reside? If there is any such thing as Maya or Avidya, we are justified in asking for its seat or abode. Verily it cannot exist in Brahman, for then the nondualism of Brahman would break down. Moreover, Brahman is said to be pure self luminous consciousness or knowledge and Avidya means ignorance. Then how can ignorance exist in knowledge? Again, Avidya cannot reside in the indvidual self, for the individuality of the self is said to be the creation of Avidya. How can the cause depend on its effect? Hence Avidya cannot exist either in Brahman or in Jiva. It is an illusory concept, a figment of the Advaitin's imagination. If it resides anywhere, it resides only in the mind of the Advaitin who has imagined this wonderful pseufo-concept, this logical myth TirodhAnanupapatti: How can Avidya conceal Brahman? If it does, then Brahman is not self-conscious and self-luminous subject. If Brahman is of the nature of self-luminosity and self-proved pure knowledge, Ignorance cannot cover or veil its essence. It is as absurd as to say that darkness can hide light or that night can act as a veil on day. Svarupanupapatti: What is the nature of Avidya? Is it positive(real) or negative or both or neither? If it is positive then how can it be Avidya? Avidya means ignorance and ignorance means absence of knowledge. To regard Ignorance as positive is to accept self-contradiction. Moreover if Ignorance is positive, how can it be ever destroyed? No positive entity can be destroyed. As the Advaitin admits that ignorance is removed by Knowledge, Ignorance can never be positive. And if Avidya is negative , then how can it project this world illusion on Brahman? To Say that Avidya is both positive and negative is to embrace self-contradiction. And to say that it is neither positive nor negative is to give up all logic.
no, did you know your name always? there was a time you learnt your own name. your ignorance of your own name ended then. when did it start before that?
@AB-yp7nc this gets complicated In a hurry .. I can bring in previous births and names ... but then you can question ..to whom the names belongs... and to me they were names that appeared and disappeared ...none of them belonged/belongs/will ever belong to me
I was thinking about this question. I believe ignorance is just a journey to enlightenment. One knowledgeable step at a time that keeps removing it. The journey only exists when there’s a destination. The destination is the reality that makes the journey relevant. The self-realization of Brahman is the destination and the only reality and ignorance only comes into picture when there’s no self realization yet. Hence, ignorance can’t be a separate reality.
That's correct.... As Advaita always claims that it will give you what was already there and will take what was not there... In reality there is no ignorance... no ignorant... But only knowledge... Upon realisation you will find out that this ignorance... you ... this world...and a that there is a truth apart from you and your journey to that truth... all these reasonings, philosophies, science, world everything known and unknown is not but you yourself all the way... you were trying to find out yourself and all that you were seeing is you yourself and nothing else...🙏🙏
Then try this.... Just be understood that ignorance is just an appearance. It's not real as you are unreal and it seems to be real as you feel you are real...🙏
@@sreekanthp8839 You think I have not heard this before? You are giving circular reasoning. Are you saying that the vyavaharika reality does not exist? It may not be the ultimate reality but it does exist. Maya does exist. Why? If it is due to ignorance then ignorance comes before Maya came into existence. If you say that both Maya and Brahman have been existing for ever, then i'm sorry i would say it does not make sense.
@@vs9324 No dear... I am not saying that... I am just saying that the ignorance and the ignorant are not two seperate things .. ignorance is you yourself as this chithabhasa.. See what Swami is telling that, you are having ignorance only when you are ignorant of the reality that the ignorance is not there... What you are searching for ... in this case ignorance is not even there at the first place and if the cause itself is unreal... then the effect will also become unreal and the whole circular paradox of cause and effect itself is unreal... See... I am not telling that vyavaharika does not exist... But it's not what you think it is... It's not as you perceive it... rather it's the reality itself... Just like rope and snake... In ignorance you see the snake and when someone tells you that it's not a snake, but a rope and you are ignorant of the rope and you ask him this same question of ignorance of rope... What will be the answer... Just think about it... Just keep this example in mind and think about it... Don't hurry to reply back... Think thoroughly and reply....🙏🙏
@@vs9324I can't claim to have fully imbibed this, so this is a comment for both of us: ignorance 'creates' Jiva, in the sense that it is a simultaneous co existence; if one ceases to exist, the other disappears (from the nasadiya sukta: then, neither death existed, nor immortality. Death has to exist for immortality, just as heat has to exist for cold, or good has to exist for bad). Also, trying to work on logic from Paramatmika level is meaningless, simply because logic can operate only in duality, while Paramatmika state is beyond even experiential. Does this work? I am not sure if it works for me! 😂
@@vs9324Also, considering time to be within the realm of experiencer, trying to reason it out while holding time space causation as real would not work out (guess I am restating the same stuff I told before?!). However, from intellectual point of view, Adwaita doesn't hold world as unreal, but rather unclassifiable as either real or unreal, because it is real in the sense that we do experience it, but unreal in the sense that it is ever changing, and dream like if you look at either the past or future (you could only ascertain the present moment as real, and past and future only in terms of cause-effect). For the enlightened, "God alone is, and everything is not" (paraphrasing swamiji paraphrasing Swami Vivekananda)
![Sadhguru at Columbia University, New York - Youth and Truth, Apr 29, 2019 [Full Talk]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/WISajR6x45A/mqdefault.jpg)
What a thought provoking lecture! Thoroughly enjoyed 🙏
Ignorance is like a 'partition' in computer science. You can take 1 harddrive (with all the knowlege on it) and partition it into segments, such that each segment has no access to the whole. Thus, ignorance is a power of Brahman, which it uses to create smaller expierences than it's complete self, as the whole. Why? Boredom, exploration, love. Within infinity is all possible knowledge, and partitions of that knowledge.
Good Analogy !
Ur analogy makes sense 😊
Awesome analogy
This is not an explanation or even a functional analogy. All it does is say ignorance is somehow a positive capability without explaining in what way. Can Brahman will itself into non-existence?
@@nanashi7779 Brahman IS existence, by definition. Non-existence is anti- to Brahman, sort of like anti-matter to matter. Also, Brahman, by definition of advaita vedanta is singular (non-dual), so it cannot be assumed to have a dual state of existence AND non-existence.
Besides, who says Brahman has "will"? So what you posit is not a reasonable scenario, you are just putting up an anti- prefix to all that is Brahman (Sat-Chit-Ananda), and asking Brahman to will itself to be Asat, Achit and Nananda. This is just a non-question, similar to asking whether you can be non-you. Can you be non-you?
All the possible attempts of addressing the cause of IGNORANCE will only lead to PARADOX!
SILENCE is the only EFFECTIVE answer for the fundamental question of Ignorance!?
In SILENCE ignorance melts away....
🙏🙏🙏
Pranam Maharaj
Jai Shree Ramakrishna
" Avidyaayaa: Avidyaathvam Idham-eva thu lakshanam
Yath Pramaana-asahishnuthvam Anyathaa Vasthu Saa Bhaveth "
-- [ Brihadaranyakavarthika , 181 ]
The definition of Avidya or ' Ignorance'(not-knowing) is that 'its ever not knowable '... itself. It can never be known or defined through any ' means of knowledge ' (pramana).... Or else , it would be Real (Vasthu).
The problem of existential or fundemental ignorance is a very important matter for every spiritual tradition. According to great teachers of humankind to live in ignorance means living in a "dark cave of the bondage" (Plato), under the tyrany of sins and death (Jesus), in the vicious circle of suffering (Gautam Buddha). According especially existentialist philosophers the living in ignorance means to live in forgetfulness about your mortality and the absence of any meaning of life. As a summary the ignorance means to live in the condition of selfdeception and slavery.
Pranams Maharaj.. is ignorance forgetfulness ? I forget I'm wearing the spectacles and find it on my nose..? Vismarana ?
Dear Swani, enlightened beings don't need to search for source of their ignorance because they become the whole. Remembering Self is source of this magic.
R
A
M
A
K
R
I
S
H
N
A
Sarvapriyananda Puri..
.
*
💜
Metaphors by writing your names..
.
From consciousness arises name and form and from name and form arises consciousness and with the cessation of consciousness is the cessation of name and form and vise versa.
Name and form does not give rise to consciousness.
18:35 Lord Shiva coming in our dreams cannot be considered as unreal/maya or part of a dream. He is the paramaatma, the ultimate reality and absolute consciousness. If he visits then it's not considered maya. Its a reality because he is not binded by maya like us sentient beings. He is the brahman who CREATED maya.
P.S whether u call this brahman krishna/shiva/maa durga it's one and the same. No difference
एकम सत विप्रा बहुधा वदन्ति
Lord Shiva is not paramatma. The paramatma doesn't even have any name and description.
@@riteshsenpai6572 Adi Shakaracharya of Advaita Vedanta considered him as Paramaatma as Parameshwara and didn't have any problem worshipping him, writing so many hymns for him and taking his NAME. He was a great devotee.
@@thekindmystic No problem in worshiping him. But Just because someone considered him as a paramatma doesn't make it a fact.
@@riteshsenpai6572 He's not just SOMEONE. The video you're replying on currently is of Swami Sarvapriyananda who is a Vedantic Monk and whose Guru is the Indian Philosopher and teacher of Advaita Vedanta- Adi Shakaracharya 🙏🏻 who founded the concept of non dualism.
So if that SOMEONE is worshipping Lord Shiva or Lord Krishna then I think they know what they are doing. So let's pay our respects to these wise gurus and try to follow their words and their paths 🙏🏻
@@thekindmystic I really respect them. And it's their path. I do not have any problem with them but your statement. So I was just correcting you. Lord Shiva , Lord Krishna are Deities. They have their work to do. They are like workers in the kingdom of Paramatma. 🙏
Swami is such a brilliant speaker, my goodness. Has Swami heard Shantena Sabbadini speak about Laozi and non-locality?
At first see who are you. The answer is Atman/Brahman. Realise yourself as the Self. Then see does the Self have ignorance about itself? The answer is no. Then why you bother asking the question?
Also, Brahman has taken form of the mind. The purpose of the mind is to be ignorant ar first then do spiritual sadhana then to become enlightened. Therefore, don't worry with the question.
जय हो श्री स्वामी विवेकानन्द, जय हो श्री सच्चिदानन्द, जय श्री रामकृष्ण परमहंस नमोस्तुते।🙏🏼
These answers are nothing less than Bhasyas and Upanishads catering to the modern inquirer who is nothing less in the history of Advaita inquiry. Several statements made by Swamiji hit something inside directly. Here is my understanding to this question. Ignorance is not a “thing”. For e.g. A woman becomes a mother only in relation to a child. Brahman becomes “Ignorance” only in relation to an Ignorant person. A deeper inquiry will reveal there is no “thing” or no “body” called a person. Similar to, "if there is no child, there is no mother"- Where "there is no ignorant person, there is no ignorance". Maha Maya is nothing but Brahman itself. She is not in Brahman. She is Brahman. She is an activity of Brahman.
The best answer is in Gaurapadas dream theory...that sleep n dream....the awaken state is also dream state,now the ignorance of the person in the dream don't matter anything to the person who is awakened....
11:39 - but Swamiji, considering German, or for that matter, any language to be born out of idea, having no existential significance.
Isn't learning the language, then, is actually covering oneself with a veil of ignorance? Making "efforts" to learn a system of knowledge with its roots in ideation that exploits or uses the reasoning capabilities of human brain?
Delicious lecture ❤
However: the chicken and the egg “paradox” is not a singular reasoning issue but a lack of information revealed/asked in the question.
the talk is very nice. however this may be overthinking much simpler comcepts . much of verses in upanishads may have much simpler and straightforward answers.
"ignorance is a potential side effect of any perception "
may be a much simpler , concise way to represnt this idea .
why pull Brahman into this whole discussion ?
Great and exhaustive exscursus about the problem of ignorance. The first answer is the best.
Pranam Guruji 🙏
The more suitable understanding would be that Brahman is dreaming and thus in his dream it sees the world.
🙏🙏🙏
Simply playing hide and seek with itself.
🕉️THANK YOU ☸️
😍🌹🧡💖🤗💝
Pranam Swami Jee 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
Namaskaram Swamiji 🙏🌷
Namaskar Swamiji 🙏❤️🙏
Pranams...., 👏👏👏💐💕💖🕉️
Absurd answer.
Ashrayanupapatti: What is the locus or support of Maya? Where does Avidya reside? If there is any such thing as Maya or Avidya, we are justified in asking for its seat or abode. Verily it cannot exist in Brahman, for then the nondualism of Brahman would break down. Moreover, Brahman is said to be pure self luminous consciousness or knowledge and Avidya means ignorance. Then how can ignorance exist in knowledge? Again, Avidya cannot reside in the indvidual self, for the individuality of the self is said to be the creation of Avidya. How can the cause depend on its effect? Hence
Avidya cannot exist either in Brahman or in Jiva. It is an illusory concept, a figment of the Advaitin's imagination. If it resides
anywhere, it resides only in the mind of the Advaitin who has imagined this wonderful pseufo-concept, this logical myth
TirodhAnanupapatti: How can Avidya conceal Brahman? If it does, then Brahman is not self-conscious and self-luminous
subject. If Brahman is of the nature of self-luminosity and self-proved pure
knowledge, Ignorance cannot cover or veil its essence. It is as absurd as to say that darkness can hide light or that night can
act as a veil on day.
Svarupanupapatti: What is the nature of Avidya? Is it positive(real) or negative
or both or neither? If it is positive then how can it be Avidya? Avidya means ignorance and ignorance means absence of knowledge. To regard Ignorance as positive is to accept self-contradiction. Moreover if Ignorance is positive, how can it be ever
destroyed? No positive entity can be destroyed. As the Advaitin admits that ignorance is removed by Knowledge, Ignorance can never be positive. And if Avidya is negative , then how can
it project this world illusion on Brahman? To Say that Avidya is both positive and
negative is to embrace self-contradiction.
And to say that it is neither positive nor negative is to give up all logic.
The answer is that one cannot find God through reasoning, one has to look elsewhere. The most likely place to look is inside your own heart.
@@TheEmptyBeing Joke answer. By such illogical answers, the Adwaitins have made a joke of studying scriptures.
🙏🙏
Ignorance can have a start .. say I have alzheimers and forget my name.. we could say it has a start
no, did you know your name always? there was a time you learnt your own name. your ignorance of your own name ended then. when did it start before that?
@AB-yp7nc this gets complicated In a hurry .. I can bring in previous births and names ... but then you can question ..to whom the names belongs... and to me they were names that appeared and disappeared ...none of them belonged/belongs/will ever belong to me
I was thinking about this question. I believe ignorance is just a journey to enlightenment. One knowledgeable step at a time that keeps removing it. The journey only exists when there’s a destination. The destination is the reality that makes the journey relevant. The self-realization of Brahman is the destination and the only reality and ignorance only comes into picture when there’s no self realization yet. Hence, ignorance can’t be a separate reality.
That's correct.... As Advaita always claims that it will give you what was already there and will take what was not there... In reality there is no ignorance... no ignorant... But only knowledge... Upon realisation you will find out that this ignorance... you ... this world...and a that there is a truth apart from you and your journey to that truth... all these reasonings, philosophies, science, world everything known and unknown is not but you yourself all the way... you were trying to find out yourself and all that you were seeing is you yourself and nothing else...🙏🙏
I'm not convinced withe answers. All the stated answers viz ignorance is in Jiv atma, in Paramatma or that it does not matter, are unconvincing.
Then try this.... Just be understood that ignorance is just an appearance. It's not real as you are unreal and it seems to be real as you feel you are real...🙏
@@sreekanthp8839 You think I have not heard this before? You are giving circular reasoning. Are you saying that the vyavaharika reality does not exist? It may not be the ultimate reality but it does exist. Maya does exist. Why? If it is due to ignorance then ignorance comes before Maya came into existence. If you say that both Maya and Brahman have been existing for ever, then i'm sorry i would say it does not make sense.
@@vs9324 No dear... I am not saying that... I am just saying that the ignorance and the ignorant are not two seperate things .. ignorance is you yourself as this chithabhasa.. See what Swami is telling that, you are having ignorance only when you are ignorant of the reality that the ignorance is not there... What you are searching for ... in this case ignorance is not even there at the first place and if the cause itself is unreal... then the effect will also become unreal and the whole circular paradox of cause and effect itself is unreal...
See... I am not telling that vyavaharika does not exist... But it's not what you think it is... It's not as you perceive it... rather it's the reality itself... Just like rope and snake... In ignorance you see the snake and when someone tells you that it's not a snake, but a rope and you are ignorant of the rope and you ask him this same question of ignorance of rope... What will be the answer... Just think about it...
Just keep this example in mind and think about it... Don't hurry to reply back... Think thoroughly and reply....🙏🙏
@@vs9324I can't claim to have fully imbibed this, so this is a comment for both of us: ignorance 'creates' Jiva, in the sense that it is a simultaneous co existence; if one ceases to exist, the other disappears (from the nasadiya sukta: then, neither death existed, nor immortality. Death has to exist for immortality, just as heat has to exist for cold, or good has to exist for bad).
Also, trying to work on logic from Paramatmika level is meaningless, simply because logic can operate only in duality, while Paramatmika state is beyond even experiential. Does this work? I am not sure if it works for me! 😂
@@vs9324Also, considering time to be within the realm of experiencer, trying to reason it out while holding time space causation as real would not work out (guess I am restating the same stuff I told before?!). However, from intellectual point of view, Adwaita doesn't hold world as unreal, but rather unclassifiable as either real or unreal, because it is real in the sense that we do experience it, but unreal in the sense that it is ever changing, and dream like if you look at either the past or future (you could only ascertain the present moment as real, and past and future only in terms of cause-effect). For the enlightened, "God alone is, and everything is not" (paraphrasing swamiji paraphrasing Swami Vivekananda)