Advaita Debate: Brain vs Brahman
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 гру 2023
- Support this channel by becoming a member / @vimoh
Or make a one-time donation by clicking the Super Thanks button under this video!
I am Vimoh, an Indian atheist and my videos have to do with religion, atheism, Indian culture, and sometimes contemporary political happenings.
Below are some videos from this channel that every Indian atheist must watch.
✔️ Videos for the Indian atheist - • Delving Deeper
✔️ How I became an atheist - • My journey between rel...
✔️ Why I am not a "Hindu atheist" - • Why I am not a Hindu A...
✔️ Why I am not a "Hindu atheist" (part 2) - • Belief in karma = beli...
✔️ The Indian atheist problem - • The Indian atheist pro...
✔️ Why atheism is important - • You can't fight irrati...
I would be glad to pay for the discussion with Swami Sarvapriyanda.
Class 12 NCERT BIOLOGY CH-1:
CONSCIOUSNESS: The ability of living beings to respond to external activities outside the body(stimuli).
That is an incorrect defintion. There are no defintions for conciousness yet ! There are only made up definitions. Definitions exist for things we understand. When we dont understand, we cannot 'DEFINE' it
Go to j krishnamurti to understand it
That’s in class 11 actually. But still that definition isn’t satisfactory.
@@anupam3904 Yeah, but there is no better explanation we have yet, simplified at a general level
Class 11th ch 1 se hai not 12th
Highlight of the video : The brain is a part of my body and it did not go anywhere.
Who is my here...? If it's your brain... Your body then who is that "my"?
@@kidsvideos4fun What do you consider as an onion, its skins or whole onion? What do you consider as a car, its engine wheels or chassis?
@@joyobrotohira7676Onions or Car are not conscious.
@@aresetramadiraizel8810there is no sensery perspection+ brain so we can say there in no consciousness right
@@Krishnakantdahiya Senses are not consciousness. Plants have senses too, they can sense sunlight and Water and act accordingly, but they lack a conscious
I agree with vimoh that advaita is just a thought. But he is wrong in telling we are unconscious when we go to sleep, no neuroscientist would say so. And by consciousness is not meant what he thinks is meant. If it was so simple we wouldn't be having so much discussion around the topic. Again i am not here to teach, but both vimoh and the person talking are ignorant about both advaita and neuroscience. Such topics are highly technical and i think i have problem with dumbing things down.
Subconscious is the word for sleep
Exactly lmao saying that consciousness leaves us while sleeping is factually wrong lol. The mind produces dreams. Who is experiencing the dreams? Consciousness obv
Isn't everything a thought?
vimoh just fumbled the words!! sleep is something we would describe as subconscious!!
he kept it simple, he co related consciousness with brain and gave valid points, and neuroscience is a field to go much more depper in the future....but in simple terms brain is producing consciousness as far as we have experienced
@@saugyatwell there are thoughts and there are facts. Thoughts can be fact or fiction but fact is always a fact.
Make more of such videos vimoh
What a topic to discuss
Concciousness is a result of several activities of neural system and it can't be actually defined keeping a single factor/frame in mind. We are talking about processing sound, light and emotions simultaneously!
So, its not that simple....
Consciousness can exist even without stimuli. Even without an active amygdala in the brain consciousness stays.
@@aresetramadiraizel8810 Source please?
@@aresetramadiraizel8810the proof of consciousness is eternal and has mixed with brain is that
In meditation you can observe your thoughts apart from being the brain
Or it could be brain produces it but after the production it detaches from brain
Ah Vipuls word salad damaged my brain, consciousness, and mind. I disagree with Vimoh, the caller may actually not have been conscious during the call.
he is brain dead lmao
Ye caller sahab ne consciousness or philosophy ka definitive kis dictionary se pdha tha?
Vedanta and neuroscience ki mix khichdi but I don't like khichdi
the consciousness you are referring to is of scientific explanation
That arises from brain functioning
The consciousness advait is talking about is the pure consciousness uneffected and unchanged
The thing that says the brain that you want to hold a pencil , you want to walk is conscioussness mixed with body that produces "aham" ego
And when it's liberated its known as pure uneffected consciousness
Coz brain cannot function on its own it requires a driver that can funtion it by willing to funtion then brain sends the signals through nerves to different parts of body
Brain is dead becoz it loses consciousness still brain is there the seed (source) which was running ut has detached
Firstly human is self conscious which makes humans different from other animals. When a patient in coma he lost his self consciousness
2:32 Advaita Vedanta "says" that mind is a reflection/aspect/manifestation of the consciousness. And the reason why consciousness is incomphrensible is because it is the consciousness that is trying to understand itself. You can only experience consciousness, you can "be" conscious, someone can "say" that you're conscious because your consciousness is manifesting itself in different forms or ways - whether through material or non-material medium i.e. body or mind, is a different debate altogether.
So…we have to believe what Advaita Vedanta says ? Why ? It’s speculative and very imaginative…but that’s all
It's a good speculation, but again we have zero evidence to support that speculation.
Whereas atleast we have a supporting evidence for our current understanding of consciousness.
bhai I fucking got this ! I fcking got this hurraaaaaahhhhhhh.... After listening to more than 500 videos of Acharya prashant (and few of JK) I understood every single word you ACTUALLY meant ! Obviously to a layman it will go beyond head cuz firstly confirmation bias (that I must not fall to the speakers words) and secondly because of not knowing the "fundamentals" of few terms here.
And that is why having knowledge in following 3 subjects helps to grasp the "truth" better : Evolutionary biology, Neuroscience, Psychology.
Brother I love youuuuuuu ! Take the kissesss :))
So the further implication of this entire thing is that all the emotions/thoughts/desires are of mind (which is part of body, not you cuz you are the observer/seer/concioussness/atma/truth) just like how the sexual urge is very bodily.
So that means your body will do its functions like sexual desire/emotions/thoughts etc but you don't have to CLINGE/ATTACH/IDENTIFY yourself with that. Just "witness/know/observe" these emotions/thoughts/desire as they rise and in the very observation they just dissolve ! Haina? FCK I FCKING GOT THIS DAMN ! All thanks to JK and prashant sir :))
The entire duality of excitement,pleasure,suffering is in this bloody "identification" with maya/ego (other name for bodily centre) and when one 'understands' this and more importantly lives it by being in state of "attention", he/she is liberated from all feelings of fear/suffering . And this itself is called nirvana/enlightment damn ! No superpower/magic , its all the game of being a sharp observant and understanding. And a way for constant rememberance of this entire thing is questioning urself "who am I" ! And that is why this question is given immense value by all knowledgable ones. Its not about the answer but its about "negation" (called neti-neti) right?
Love you bro
@@smarathe301 I just paraphrased what the school of thought has/had to say about the matter that is being discussed in the video. It is quite obvious that philosophical ideas do not come from, and go, via scientific method. It would be rather absurd to bring science; experimentation, evidence, proof, etc., into this discussion by countering something that does not comply with science using science. That's all.
Speaking on a biological view consciousness is a response and stimuli based thing which is more complicated technically.....
It's not a physical thing and cannot be detected by any instrument the thing we can detect are the causes of consciousness we have till observed physically...and it can't be understood by science because science is study analysis and research on physical world
Something which is not physical how it could be understood on the basic pillars of science
And irony is that consciousness itself cannot be denied
So basically
Study neuroscience, psychology
And philosophy at least we will get an idea further logic goes....
And this also cannot be denied that it goes beyond the human logic goes...
Vimoh let me know your view please
Agree 110% with you man. Religions, adveita, spiritual teachings are ALL speculations. I doubt all this bs. I only trust my EXPERIENCE. I'm glad to see someone doing pushback to these people who talk about things for which they have ZERO EVIDENCE. Thanks for what you do
the consciousness you are referring to is of scientific explanation
That arises from brain functioning
The consciousness advait is talking about is the pure consciousness uneffected and unchanged
The thing that says the brain that you want to hold a pencil , you want to walk is conscioussness mixed with body that produces "aham" ego
And when it's liberated its known as pure uneffected consciousness
Coz brain cannot function on its own it requires a driver that can funtion it by willing to funtion then brain sends the signals through nerves to different parts of body
Brain is dead becoz it loses consciousness still brain is there the seed (source) which was running ut has detached
Vimoh, *Consciousness* is the ability to experience.
And only the person experiencing can tell for sure if they are conscious or not.
When they are awake they can tell it.
When they are asleep they can't.
But after waking up, they can tell that I had a nightmare,
or my shoulder was hurting the entire night,
or I slept like a baby(peacefully).
That means they were having an experience.
Even in sleep consciousness is there.
Hmm nope u r wrong , consciousness is not only EXPERIENCE, BUT "EXPERIENCE of external activities".the person who had nightmare is indeed experience but he wasn't conscious at that time , that is dreams , nightmares which are termed as unconscious experience. Dream or nightmare is considered conscious only when the person is experiencing that moment of dream and simultaneously he can tell you that that he is having a dream , no one can tell that,atleast untill now . As vimoh said without the brain there is no consciousness but without the consciousness there is still a brain inside our skull.
@@akash_khandey No, who said consciousness is about external activities only? It's awareness of any experience.
Dreams are also experienced by you.
@@karansarin1986doesn't necessarily have to be dreams though... You can still be unconscious and not dreaming, or being knocked out cold, or in a coma, or maybe vegetable state of mind. Brain keeps working, ability to experience is lost.
@@karansarin1986 can you sleep without having a brain?
@@karansarin1986bro , when u r a noob then its good shut up your mouth
Sorry for my language but bro u seriously need j krishnamurti
.
Go and watch his whole 5 videos of switzerland
Here are some quotes from Jiddu Krishnamurti's teachings on why we can't define or describe consciousness:
- "The moment you try to capture it [consciousness] in words, it's gone."
- "Consciousness is not something that can be defined, it's not something that can be put into words."
- "The description is not the described; the word is not the thing."
- "We can't grasp it [consciousness] through thought, because thought is part of it."
- "The mind can't conceive it [consciousness], because the mind is part of it."
- "You can't think about it [consciousness]; thinking is part of it."
These quotes highlight JK's emphasis on the limitations of language and thought in capturing the essence of consciousness. He encourages a direct, non-conceptual approach to understanding consciousness, rather than relying on definitions or descriptions.
We can observe our physical reality like we can observe our hands ,legs etc. the same as we can also observe our emotions like anger, sadness, happiness. So what is observing all those physical as well as mental conditions..?
In Advaita vedanta it says brahman is "nirguna" but it doesn't mean that it has no "gunas" it means its static.
Can anyone say that they observed their consciousness while they are in deep dreamless sleep..?
Is that means it wasn't their...? Its still there but your are not able to observe because you are in deep sleep and when you wake up, with the help of mind you can say that there's consciousness.
So death doesn't mean that our consciousness is also died rather there is no element to understand it.
And afterall it can only understand by having a lot more time spending with thyself otherwise you will always stay in the agnostic side even if you read all advaita vedantic scriptures. Theoretical evidence has nothing to do with spirituality.
you have put this very well brother ! Only that can be put in words which is tangible ,the thing with conciousness/atma/nothingness (the state of intelligence as Acharya prashant says) is that it can only be lived ! The moment its put into words, the true meaning is distorted. That is why "silence" is the best answer (as raman maharshi says). Am I getting this correct brother?
@@preetgamer1495 true..
The silence meant by Ramana Maharshi was not only having time without talking but also not hearing, listening,or thinking about anything. The true nature of Nirguna Brahman.
Tbh it's not a science for theoretical knowledge,in order to understand, one should experience it
@@_That_which_is_not_ well said !
Sir please hold some live debates as well. Your biggest fan, lots of love
This happened live last night. On my live stream channel. I do them every saturday at 8 pm.
@@vimoh what's your live stream channel? Would be nice of you to let you know. Thanks
Vimoh Live. Link on main page
It was a good debate, but I still feel consciousness is something different from just physical bodily matter (brain, heart and body). Cause you can put all the physical stuff together but it won't come to life despite having everything necessary to be a functional human being. so where does life in things (bodily matter) come from?
Edit: I also believe that there should be room for exploration as many scientific discoveries began from philosophies and wrong hypothesis.
Your feeling doesn't count . We need evidence .
@@Slade69 what are ur evidences to conclude that consciousness is mind itself
@@psroutine7132 burden of proof is on the one making the claim . If you are going to provide such weak arguments it's better to not respond at all.
@@Slade69 While the object of experience is complex and obvious the subject is more subtle and simple.
Like the forms u perceive in the universe are subject to change but the eye is relatively more subtle and remains the same.
The eye too is changeable (weak vision etc)and and an object and the perceiver is the mind .
It applies to other sensony organs as well.
Then the mind too like other sensory organs, is subject to change, like desiring or doubting, fear, courage etc, and there is something which is the witness of such changes.
What argument do I give to a man who thinks that there is no no consciousness when u sleep. Who doesn't know the basics of what he is talking about.
Now if u respond , respond with a real argument not just a random claim
@@psroutine7132i can say, consciousness is neurological thing.
I have gone through almost all of your videos and I m assuming that you are more agnostic than atheist. Isn't it ? If not plz make a video about the differences between an agnostic and an atheist ?
Plz make a video on hyper quest
Do we consider nervou system and brain as one or they are two different parts connected to each other?
Upnishad and neuroscients both approach consciousness defarently. Word ek h but mean alag h
@@Krishnakantdahiya Agree, but my question is not about consciousness firt I want to understand what the brain is, as this video talks about correlation between brain and consciousness. So again my question is do we consider brain and nervous system as on or two different parts of body?
If brain is machine then consciousness is computation.
So you think computers are conscious too?
No you might say bcs they are programmed.
But what about a very primitive bacteria is it consciousness it also makes calculation to catch it's prey. What about mosquito?
Ants? I think consciousness is a product of brain.
But being alive requires soul.
I would stop believing that being alive requires soul once we are able to create a living being no matter how small.
One can say consciousness is just neurological thing. Other says its essence
But manipulating the machine doesn't alter the consciousness anyhow. We can put the brain to sleep, coma or even damage it but the consciousness stays the same.
@@aresetramadiraizel8810 how do you know it does not? Infact killing a body makes a person unconscious
@@shivkumar0810 I said Manipulating not destroying. What happens to self after death has been under debate since ages, we're talking about how merely Tinkering with the brain doesn't affect one's consciousness at all
Theists behave as advocates not rationalist.They have to prove something right even if their statements are actually incorrect.
Consciousness is usually identified with mind, but mental consciousness is only the human range which no more exhausts all the possible ranges of consciousness than human sight exhausts all the gradations of colour or human hearing all the gradations of sound - for there is much above or below that is to man invisible and inaudible. So there are ranges of consciousness above and below the human range, with which the normal human [consciousness] has no contact and they seem to it unconscious...
- Sri Aurobindo
1) "Vimoh:- We don't know of any examples of Consciousness existing without the mind"
is like saying "We don't know any example of electromagnetic field without the electrons" The Electromagnetic field exists, and is all pervading, without the electrons. So your conclusion that conscious has to exist only if minds exist is false.
2) How do we know the brain generates Consciousness?
"Vimoh:- Because when the brain stops working there is no consciousness"
This is like saying when the compass breaks there is no magnetic field anymore.
dude, when the compass breaks it stops detecting the field. Same maybe extended theoretically for Consciousness. When the brain stops functioning it stops capturing the field of consciousness.
3) "Vimoh:- We know that water is there but we don't know that about Consciousness"
This is like saying "We don't know that about the Electromagnetic field"
How do we know if the electromagnet if field exists?
when it manifests itself only though light or its interaction with the charged particles.
We only see light or the charged particles, we never see the field directly.
So if you accept that, you may as well entertain Consciousness as a field.
4) "Vimoh:- There is no reason to think the consciousness has simply been cut off"
Yes because if it is a field, it is not cut off, only that the ability of brain to capture the field is no longer there.
5) Vimoh:- It is all we know there is no reason to think that we know more than that. -
However, science or any investigation works at the boundary of known and unknown, and i will give you a reason to think differently. I agree that we don't know more than that. But we also don't know more than charged particles and light. And YET WE BELIEVE IN THE ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD.
VIMOH has not studied science and it shows.
6) "Vimoh:-Except speculation perhaps": - exactly this is where science thrives. Possibility of something might be true ,is where some space for scientific investigation using theoretical modelling and further testing.
7) "Vimoh:- Consciousness is inextricably linked to brain", is saying that a detector is inextricably linked with the field or particles.
or like saying a compass in inextricably linked with magnetic field.
dude the compass does not generate the magnetic field it exists outside the compass and despite the compass.
"Vimoh:- when the brain goes , consciousness does not come back ", is like saying when the compass needle breaks magnetic field does not come back.
8)"Vimoh:- So logically it seems like Consciousness is more dependent on the brain than brain on consciousness,"
This is like saying, magnetic field is dependent on the compass than compass on the magnetic field.
9) Vipan- ask the person who is unconscious if he/she is unconscious.
is like saying ask a dead man if he is dead.
10) Vimoh:- There will be some activity in your brain if you are asleep:- totally true no issues here.
11) "Vimoh:-I am Conscientiously limiting myself to what we know: ";"We" as in all humanity ?. how boastful to think vimoh "knows" everything "we" know. Of course VImoh is limiting himself, using his ignorance towards another possibility. That is also okay. As long as he doesn't make an jump from there to considering it reality.
12) "Vimoh:-Brain is at least what consciousness is contingent upon"- is like saying compass is at least magnetic field is contingent upon
13) "Vimoh"-We have no evidence of consciousness existing in things that don't have brain" AMZING POINT! THIS ISLIKE SAYING WE HAVE NO EVIDENCE OF MAGNETIC FIELD EXISTING IN THINGS THAT DONT HAVE A COMPASS NEEDLE.
14) MAYBE THIS IS WHERE WE STOP RIGHT? TELL THAT TO MICHAEL FARADAY
Wow ! You put this beatuifully bhai. So that means advait vedant/upanishads/buddha/acharya prashant/JK etc are true when they say your desires/emotions/thoughts are not YOURS cuz you are the "conciousness" while the "body" is the one that gathers all these stuff ! haina? Am I getting this right? Mind is that entity which gives birth to thoughts and "you" can observe them hence the thoughts are just the projection of mind "not yours" ! The conciousness manifests itself into all forms of external entity and probably this is what jiddu krishnamurthi meant when he said the "observed is the observer".
@@preetgamer1495 yes that's the theory.
Our body+mind creates a complex structure and mechanism that "captures" or "reflects" or "interacts" with the all pervading "field" of consciousness out there.
Rocks and other non living beings can't do it because of lack of complexity and ability for the same.
This theory is super similar to quantum field theory or electromagnetism or gravitational field theory. The compass interacts with the magnetic field/not creates the magnetic field. People like vimoh aren't ready to accept this for no reason.
I am not saying that this is 100% true theory. But we have to keep it open to consideration due to it being not disproven using experiments. And frankly it could be true.
@@sourabhjogalekar3842bhai gajab tarike se points rakhe hai aapne
What is the proof of EM fields existing without charges?. Also doctors can knock off different components of your consciousness using EM fields. They can also administer anaesthesia.
First of all Analogy is not science... science of different things is different, so there is no reason to applying analogy in consciousness and magnetic field.
Apple is not equal to orange.
Secondly, a compass detect a magnetic field bcoz it have it's own magnetic field which aligns itself in particular direction in presence of another magnetic field....if a compass is break then it's magnetic field is lost but the earth's magnetic field remains there...
Similarly, if you are dead you lose your consciousness but the things that you are concious remains there....
A tree could be considered a conscious being without a brain.
I think he is confusing between consciousness and sub consciousness, why r you toying with him Vimoh? 😊
👌
Hello vimov, I've seen some discussions you had with muslims. all of them were but with laymen. I am writing this because i think you haven't looked into islam and I've seen you reiterate same arguments that muslim duaats have dealt with in the past, so you may get some helps from them. If you want to debate or discuss with scholars you can have one with any of the duaats(muslim scholars who preach to non-muslims), there are many for example Muhammad hijab or dawah wise or zeeshan from smiletojannah etc etc.
And there are many of them who speak Hindustani as well like Mufti yasir nadeem al-wajidi, or if you want to debate evolution then you have qaiser ahmed raja.
There are many, I've just named a few.
I do a live stream every saturday at 8 pm. Feel free to join and debate.
@@vimoh I am not of the duaats, so I am not capable of these things, if you want to real discussion or debate with scholars then please do. Debating with laymen will not get us anywhere, as I said you seem to bring same arguments against Islam which are already been dealt with by the duaats.
An easy way to arrange a debate or discussion would be to contact dawahwise UA-cam channel because they have many duaats(Muslim scholars who are learned enough to preach to non-muslims). So you can choose anyone you think you could be comfortable with.🤭
I debate with whoever comes.
@@vimoh then please do it with knowledgeable duaats, talking with laymen won't get us anywhere, as I said An easy way to arrange a debate or discussion would be to contact dawahwise UA-cam channel because they have many duaats(Muslim scholars who are learned enough to preach to non-muslims). So you can choose anyone you think you could be comfortable with
@@vimoh and also if you're comfortable with Hindi/Urdu speakers, then there are also Hindi/Urdu speaking duaats like mufti Yasir Nadeem al-wajidi, or qaiser Ahmed raja(you can debate about evolution or god with him), amir haq, just to name a few. And I think you can find many Hindi/Urdu speakers on dawahwise as well.
Vimoh is correct.. His statement about the brain and consciousness comparison is untrue.
Because, in research we've a saying, correlation doesn't mean causality.
If the brain goes, the cons. also goes cannot tell us that brain causes cons..
But yes we've other ways to know that vimoh is correct.
I too felt but when i delved more into it then i got
If brain produces consciousness then how brain starts working after it is formed without any driver
Coz brain is vehicle and nutrition is fuel and a driver is needed to drive it
And a driver should be present before itself so that when the vehicle gets fuel it can go inside ti drive it
❤❤❤❤❤❤
I think J.krishnamurti explained it very well.
The relationship between consciousness and the brain raises philosophical questions about the nature of reality, the self, and free will. However, Vimohs agnostic position, while focusing on whats measurable, avoids these crucial questions. While I appreciate your emphasis on empirical evidence, I find this approach a bit problematic because it overlooks the philosophical implications of consciousness itself. Limiting the debate to an objective model of reality seems insufficient when dealing with such a subjective and nuanced phenomenon. Nonetheless, I admire your engagement in these discussions. Please keep exploring! Lots of love from Lucknow
as I said, speculation is ok. But if we don't know, we should say we don't know. Confusing theories with reality only gives rise to superstition.
@@vimoh I don't see it as a strict dichotomy between 'theory' and 'reality.' Theories attempt to explain reality, and in the case of consciousness, individual perspectives can offer insights even if they haven't been proven...superstition arises from blind acceptance, not from exploring different models
@@spoidermon561 there is a difference between knowing and speculating. that shouldn't be forgotten. that's all I'm saying. All sorts of kooky things can be put across as theories. Only evidence makes something worth consideration.
@@vimoh While kooky theories abound, who knows, maybe one day the kookiest one turns out to be the key:)
And that can only be determined after evidence shows up.
Basic scientific mindset
sote time hum unconscious nhi sub conscious hote h vimoh.
What I think is consciousness truly depends upon the mind or brain. Without brains it doesn't exist, but there are chores we usually do on a daily basis unconsciously for an example why I support this political party or why do I believe in these religious Dogmas. Is it something just an implant by society or is it my choice to really know about a particular subject.
To understand these unconscious states of mind advait came with a solution don't just believe anything ask and get to the root of it.
9:30 what vimoh said 😂
The case of the railroad worker in the 1900's clearly shows that a damaged brain changes the person. His family and friends didn't even recognise him. Consciousness of a human being could be said as the combination of all the neurons working together seemlessly. Brain surgery is sometimes conducted while keeping the patient awake and asking them to recite alphabetsto make sure the doctors do not make any mistake.
Whatever you said, has no relation to providing advaitas relevance
@@Teeeheeeteeheee I don't exactly remember why I wrote this, probably due to any mention of consciousness and from where it originates, since that is what this example mostly relates to. They must have discussed consciousness.
Is everything is energy? Do brain stay concious by neural signal's or energy. We can say that it's concious is dependent on energy?
We can say universe is concious cause lots of activities happens from atomic to galactic levels.
Do we have narrow idea of consciousness? Cause matter and energy is one and human body is form of energy.
Energy is conscious then can we understand it with pitty brain singles?
Energy is a physical thing that can me measured atleast
But consciousness is unknown appears in one's mind from no where
And if argument is that brain produces consciousness
Then how brain starts functioning when jt is formed ??
Who wants to move the hand and leg to walk so the brain sends signals to parts of body ??
@@acrylicanimed3314 I want to say everything is dependent upon universal energy. I think positively about that universal energy which is limitless intaligent controls our mind, atom, universe in a certain patterns.
There is also possible that other dimensions could be there, There is certain unique energy that controls everything. And I also positive about without his consent you cannot know it.
I believe in different dimension of universe and different energies which are out of human reach. I'm very positive about the universal energy is cause of consciousness, our thoughts, all the happenings and could not be understand by human resources. Which is ultimately GOD. Without his wish you never gonna know.
@@acrylicanimed3314 Consciousness is a kind of energy. Science keep correcting itself Humans first know light energy then explore to fire thermal energy further explore to chemical energy again explore to electric energy again nuclear energy keep exploring. That means we believe in more form of energies and evolved.
How can we say that there is no controller of this world cause we are seeing that everything is being controlled and in regulation.
Then there is also possibility that some of energies are out of human acknowledgement.
Brahman is the mind of minds, name of names, form of forms, the Absolute and it can only be witnessed as it is the 'I'. ( 'I' is 'THAT' which is formless and accessible for consciousness to witness). It cannot be experienced, nor sensed and certainly cannot be talked about directly.
The existence of the indescribable 'I'(which is the mind of minds, form of forms, name of names) for interaction to take place is the proof of Brahman, and certainly one cannot prove to 'I' that 'I' exists. If one doesn't believe in Brahman, linguistically he can only be asked, 'What is sense of all senses? Name of all names?'. Language will fail at this point and the speaker will have to go beyond it to witness it. All people experience the 'I' when they sleep when they go past their dreams and beyond. Now can one wake up and witness the 'beyond dreams and rest state' while remaining in the interaction is where Advaita Vedanta makes people suffer and people start getting all sorts of ideas about enlightenment.
Can’t be experienced, sensed or talked about ? Yet we have to take your word for this word salad ?
@@smarathe301 it can be witnessed. Like I say draw me a bird and you draw anything like a pigeon, crow, parrot anything, it will simply not be a bird, yet you witness the 'bird' in all the drawings. One cannot simply draw a 'bird' if you get what I mean, yet its the essence of the drawing and of real birds as well. We experience parrot, crow etc, but only witness the 'bird'. Similarly we can only witness the Absolute, the Brahman. And its not as if I get a power over you by telling you all this. Its not like this comes with any baggage, like I'm talking about existence of Allah or something. Its just the nature of existence I'm talking about. It doesn't depend on anybody buying or not buying the fact to be true. Its like atoms don't depend on someone's belief that they exist, yet they do. So is the fact that there is something like the Absolute, the form of forms and people have witnessed it, like a scientist witnessing the atoms. Only that atoms can be talked about, but not Brahman. one can talk a lot around it, that colorless Absolute, like saying 'I is THAT'.
I think Brahman should do a Turing test of Atman , if it passes then Advaita is true 😂
Advaita is not all about true or false it's like a pointer
My point is uf brain creates consciousness then how it starts working after it is formed ??
Coz brain is Vehicle and nutrition is fuel and there should be a driver entering the vehicle so that it can drive it !!
there's only 1 mind, who is the nonstop dreamer of all persons, in whose dream all brains appear. in seemingly deep sleep of person brain do not appear. when the dream seemingly wakes you, person, brain and body appears, and yes u can make a brain surgery in dream. it's all dream. all persons that sees dreaming person are also dreamt so we can't trust their testimonials. that's what advita says. it's a matter of belief. i can neither prove it nor experienced it
I think this is not an real debate the Debate partner cannot have real knowledge or conceptual knowledge about Advaita vedanta so I belive that you want some knowledgeable person to debate with him. Bro I thought if you want real discussion about the Advaita vedanta so please meet Aacharya Prashant Advaita Foundation they are very intellectual to get real debate and clear understanding of concepts of Advaita vedanta and Acharya ji really wants and appreciate like your type of people who asks Questions there's UA-cam channel is :- Acharya Prashant debate with him. Or Expose them😅.
Other fellow does look comfortable in english and hence not able to explain his POV.
Better to discuss in hindi
My point is uf brain creates consciousness then how it starts working after it is formed ??
Coz brain is Vehicle and nutrition is fuel and there should be a driver entering the vehicle so that it can drive it !!
He chose to speak in english btw
I think both Vimoh and the person lack substantial amount of knowledge and it gonna be very difficult for any atheist and agnostics to refute the claims of Advaita... and ultimately I have seen the answers boils down to "could be, might be, may be, we don't know, you may beliveve that, its a 50-50" ....
Just go through some totally proven NDE experiences recorded by doctors n experienced by neuroscientist whose brain stopped working...yet could absolutely remember their astral experience wch had similarities wth many more such experiences
Brain stopped working? As long as there is life in the body and the brain has a supply of oxygen and all other things necessary for it's survival, even if the body is in a vegetative state its not a miracle for the brain to have minimal activity. Its just biology
Lol such a nice title 😅😂
Bramha is infinite energy we are so pitty in from of him. You cannot achieve him with arrogancy and egoistic way. You need to be humble and taje shelter to him through SadGuru's
I think the arrogant one is your ilk who believes they have it all figured out, vimoh is being humble by searching and asking for evidence for a hypothetical fairytale that is advaita
@@Teeeheeeteeheee
Okay, Optemestic atheist.
By the way I'm Vaishnav There are a lot of differences between advait. I believe in scripture and that universal energy non than Krishna. How could you find the God by using his material. Like material trying to find material. He & he power beyond our intellect, imagination. Cause matter cannot move by itself it needs stimulation. Have you ever seen big stone moving or changing size no. If you do it then only it moves cause stimulation. Likewise God stimulate (प्रेरक) this universe and this how it works. You never gonna know hi by materialistic way. We need to just surrender yourself that's it. Hare Krishna 🙏✨
@@LovefoodFoodlover whole lotta yapping
@@Teeeheeeteeheee Random reply, As your wish.
In Advaita there is a difference between awareness and conciousness.
With respect to advait vedanta tge definition of conciousness and awareness is different.🙏
No adavit vedanta consciousness ko alag tarah se alag approach karti h they say consciousness is everywhere and neuroscients says sensery perspection is consciousness
Yes now like daid Chalmers preety much sure consciousness is not product of mind and body 💪💪
@@Krishnakantdahiya yes awareness ko pragna bola jata hain. Conciousness ko chetna kaha gaya hain.
@@mystickabuganjchetna aur atma
His knowledge of advaita vedanta is extremely shallow. Consciousness points to outer object-you are talking about something, so that something is the object to which the consciousness is pointing, so it does not know itself-fragmented consciousness. But when consciousness acknowledges itself, which is a very difficult thing to achieve while having the mind(thoughts, memory, experiences etc) active. You may say I acknowledge my consciousness but that acknowledgement too is a thought only. That which observes is not the mind. Vedanta defines mind as that which has memory, experience, etc. So awareness is a new thing here, beyond mind.
Nothing should be denied so easily unless you can reverse engineer the idea of the " one " who has written the text, and not the text. First 3-4 pages itself of Kena Upanishads will will make you realize you do not knkw anything. And whatsoever you are saying, vedanta is too clever and already has subjected those things and you talking this, so you are speaking nothing new, and you are inside the box, not outside and therefore your approach is not holistic n unified. Vedanta not naturally but intentionally says you cannot understand "that" by using ordinary senses or mental faculties, since it is itself the perceiver. You cannot bite your own teeth, a duality is necessary. But when your consciousness acknowledges itself, it is non-duality. If different people experience that, all experience would be the same. You can experience it in deep meditation where mind(thoughts) are been able to kept aside amd off but consciousness remains. This state is of pure awareness, and only and only such a state is of pure awareness. And when it says about "brahman", .
The assumption in the video is that brain, mind, consciousness, thoughts and observation are all one, since your idea is general. But vedanta is a highly particular and objetive thing, of the subtle. "Objective about the subtle".
3:24 But we know of consciousness existing with less of mind, brilliant guy gets in an accident.. I think you can imagine the rest. From this we can conclude at least that consciousness is not the part of the mind or brain lost in the accident.
7:40 I think what the man is trying to say is that whether you can be sure that consciousness is absent when you sleep? Sleep could be a state of brain experienced by consciousness as unconsciousness. Like if you look at monitor while the computer is put to sleep you won't see anything, I believe that doesn't mean you don't exist right? It just means the computer is not broadcasting anything to the monitor, speaker etc.. Also this state of the brain is not recording apparently, so you could be conscious and not remember it when you wake up. That also doesn't mean you were unconscious
11:00 The people who invented the word unconscious where not neuroscientists or people who knew anything with any depth about the world or the human body. So it doesn't matter what their definition of the word was. As unconscious may not mean a lack of consciousness but a lack of memory of conscious experience. Deep sleep and dream sleep are two fields of conscious experience in Vedanta.
16:47 Bacteria and viruses don't have brains. They have consciousness. That is they move towards the things they want and avoid things they don't. They sense their environment to make decisions. Looks like consciousness to me from the evidence we have after observing conscious phenomenon.
All it shows is that part of the brain is sufficient to sustain it. An absolute lack of brain will not allow us to be conscious.
@@vimoh Aah you can't say that, as I'm sure you have not experienced it. If you follow the evidence.
You could be knocked out and you can say I was unconscious after you wake up but all that means is you don't have a memory of your conscious experience not that there was no experience. This is a fact as we don't remember most of our dreams yet we know we do consciously experience dreams from experiments.
Dreams are not conscious experiences. Also, if you don't remember experiencing something, have you really experienced it?
@@vimoh Truth vs (Logic + Ignorance) seems like we would need God to settle this.
I think this kind of thought is the crux of the Vedas. Tree falls in the forest and if no one's around to hear the noise does it make a sound?
I guess truth is valid only if there's someone who sees everything don't you?
There's Malayalam movie, Kamara Shambhavam. This reminded me of that movie, a good one to watch if you're interested
@@vimoh Bollocks, that's ability to recollect. You do have a first person experience during dreams.
Arey yrr call the real man ap and debate ,, who is fake chirkut
Wow! The person who came in to talk about advaita is needs to do some more home work. Calling advaita not a proper philosophy would give any lecturer a heart attack.
It is not.
It is just like Tibetean Buddhism.
Listen to Swami Sarvapriyananda in this regard.
He gave lectures in Buddhism snd Vedanta too
Lots of woo woo in their lectures…. A word salad that’s ultimately subjective and meaningless
@@smarathe301start with who am I lecture in iitk by swami sarvpriyananda. I lean just a bit towards materialism but I completely reject how Vimoh treats idealistic philosophies without understanding them.
@@sumitdutta7043 similar yes but advaitin philosophy is much more grander and explains nature of consciousness and cosmos clearly
Bahot panchat
Modern Upanishads ❤😊
These are new age bhakts. So called 'acharya' PRASHANT bhakts. These are PHAKTS.
Ph is prounsed like F right?
Acharya Prashant ki following dekhkar gand jal rahi hai tumhari😂
I don't think we should use word belief when it comes to advaita .. one can either realize it or forget about it .. If one finds some other experiences one can document it ,.. analysing advaita by reason alone is also a folly as it talks of understanding things that are beyond mind and also senses...so I think without proper authority and scholarship on subject discussing it with each other proves nothing , when both sides agree on outset that their understanding is basic .. I think this discussion should be with some advaita practitioner like Swami Sarvapriyananda
Also I honestly don't think an atheist needs to disagree with Advaita(just to make a point that he/she rejects everything), which is a philosophy and not a religion...advaita discuss fundamental nature of reality and ways to transcend ... I would not denigrate it by calling it a religious concept and it may not be for everybody
There's no reason to even agree