Index:- *Chapter 1: The Self* 03:48 Q1 What am I? 06:42 Q2 Is there a way to see the jeeva? 08:04 Q3 How is the jeeva related to the body? 09:07 Q4 When did we come into existence? 09:46 Q5 How can one perceive eternity in an ephemeral environment? 11:26 Q6 How can one determine the existence of a jeeva within a body? 16:25 Q7 What happens to the jeeva when the body ends? 17:09 Summary *Chapter 2: Actions & Reactions* 17:44 Q8 On what basis does the jeeva take another body? 18:07 Q9 What is Karma? 18:58 Q10 In terms of a jeeva, what can the reactions be? 20:22 Q11 Does karma exist only to decide on a jeeva's next body? 22:57 Q12 Do we have free will? 30:19 Summary *Chapter 3: Innate Nature of a Jeeva* 31:10 Q13 What do you mean by innate nature? 33:08 Q14 Is the innate nature of a jeeva something that's given or passed around? 34:16 Q15 How do I ensure that my actions stay good? 36:10 Q16 Is every action subjective? 38:22 Q17 How can we ensure that every jeeva does good deeds? 40:00 Q18 Can jeevas be made to desire in a certain way so that they only incur positive reactions? 41:08 Q19 Since svabhava cannot be changed, doesn't that condemn a bad natured jeeva to bad actions & reactions? 42:40 Q20 Do good natured jeevas always choose (using their free will) to do good deeds? 46:17 Summary *Chapter 4: Concept of Liberation* 47:10 Q21 When does the cycle of continuous actions & reactions end? 48:21 Q22 Why should a jeeva aspire to get rid of karma & prakruthi? 49:18 Q23 Are there jeevas who by nature are miserable? 50:20 Q24 Aren't such bad natured jeevas condemned to suffer? 51:25 Q25 Is getting rid of karma & prakruthi termed as liberation or moksha? 53:18 Q26 Is liberation final for a jeeva or can the jeeva get bound again after liberation? 54:11 Summary *Chapter 5: Role of Eshwara* 54:37 Q27 How does a jeeva liberate himself? 56:06 Q28 What is the role of Eshwara in all this? 57:46 Q29 Why has the Lord created an imperfect world? 01:02:33 Q30 What is the Lord getting out of all this? 01:04:23 Q31 Can the Lord change the innate nature of the jeevas? 01:06:08 Q32 Why is He God and not a jeeva like you or me? 01:06:57 Summary *Chapter 6: Association* 01:07:52 Q33 What does association mean? 01:09:25 Q34 Why does God require our prayers? 01:13:06 Q35 Are prayers useless? 01:14:58 Q36 Can the jeevas become God themselves by association? 01:16:16 Q37 Can jeevas become Gods after moksha? 01:17:51 Q38 How can one be spiritual practically? 01:21:22 Summary
This is just brilliant !!!! I have been listening to Shri Bannanje Govindacharyas pravachanas for several years .. this 1hour plus conversation is just summary of that. Btw conversation process is excellent
Fundamental questions are clarified in a simplified manner not complicating too much. Pratosh has Commendable Breadth of understanding of hindu scriptures of wisdom. High level of scholarly teachings are simplified and explained. Thanks to Pratosh. He has explained "Purushartha" so beautifully for every soul on this earth can start to walk on. Not to go in to ultimately proving anything like Dwaita, Adwaita etc which probably each jeeva's experience to find its way to ultimate. He has put foundation stone to the young generation and all others to "recognise the divine playing in all matters/activities of life" so that we walk in the path of "Samskarana" (refinement) process to "getting Rid off that which is not our Swabhaava (each of our innate nature). I guess this will apply to every human being whether one belong to any school of Vedanta, philosophy or religion in the realm of Spirituality. I encourage this channel to do more of these and maintain a archive for new joiners to start from day one till some more complex questions are answered as it get progressed. Very nicely ordered the questions and asked. Again Thanks Pratosh at IIT for start sharing life technology for better life.. Transform these teachings in to a books of conversation that can be prescribed in the school.
Feast for my whole being. Thank you to Dr. Prathosh ji and the host. My sincere request to this channel is to please conduct such thought-provoking sessions. Great video.....lot of my questions were answered. Thank you very much. God bless you 🙏.
Thank you sharing these complex concepts in a simple and logical method. Please make a sequel to this! All of India's youth (especially the engineering and science universities) must watch this for how well it connects science, engineering and philosophy in simple English.
Beautiful session.. This is the absolute essesnce of Bharatiya Tatvavaada aka Madhvashaastra... The concepts which make one being all inclusive.. This is why Bhaarata has always been famous for... The knowledge... Please conduct more and more discourses like this..
I was very much impressed the way you have explained the whole concept in very simple language. We appreciate your efforts and request you to create more such videos for people like us. I had shared the video link with my Son, he was very much impressed, and he was requesting for more such videos. May God bless you all with good health, Wealth, Prosperity, Happiness & Success.
Thank you very much, Sir. It's feedback like this that encourage us to put in the effort. It's always nice to see our efforts fructify. Thank you & your son for the blessings & appreciation.
Brilliant effort. The subject by itself is very complex, even this long session hardly satisfies, as so many questions prop up. Still many concepts are dealt with. Felt only the human life(jiva) is dealt with,other jivas and their bandhana etc should also be dealt with to make the understanding of bandhana and moksha clear. One more doubt remains, that is why in first place a jiva manifests to get into karmic cycle and then try to get out of it. Looking forward to more such efforts. Pranams to Dr. Pratosh and the anchor.
You are right. The subject is huge and so many concepts are interconnected that it's very hard to choose what to include & exclude. Yes.. could have added the question of why the jeevas are put here in the first place. Will see if we can take it up in another session. In the meanwhile, if you can understand kannada, there's a video by Dr. Prabhanjanachar that exclusively deals with jeeva titled "Understanding Jeeva Svarupa". Thank you. I'll convey your words of appreciation to Dr. Prathosh.
A gem of a video. Thank you for doing this Dr. Prathosh and Mr. Srikant. Your efforts along with Dr. Vyasankere Prabhanjanacharya and Jnanagamya Prasarana Channel can start a huge spiritual revolution in this world. Hope this reaches many more.
This session was so revealing! The questioner is not an ordinary individual himself, the level of questions asked at opportune times show the depth as well as the basics. The answers were super!
Wonderful ! So much contentful and I am sure this helps for people who understand English words better than local languages. I am thankful to the Vedic Discourses group for coming up with such videos.
A beautiful way of explaining the madhwa philosophy (" reality") in a simple and understandable way for this generation by using the live examples. Great work done by all the people associated with this video and a whole hearted thanks to all of them. I am expecting more videos like this in detail for the betterment.
Blessed to watch this wonderful video. Got to get this video link and this is purely by the grace of god, and guru and thanks a ton to Dr Prathosh for his brilliant insights. Great questions by the interviewer too !
The end of the conversation is the most important for every one of us - to be associated with the Supreme. Once this is done, all other aspects fall in line automatically. Let's try to keep friendship with Sri Krsna. Then everything will become perfect. Great educative and enlightening video! Please keep up the spirit of Krsna.
🕉️🌻🙏 ಭೌತಿಕ ಹಾಗೂ ಲೌಕಿಕದಲ್ಲೇ ಮುಳುಗಿರುವ ಇಂದಿನ ಯುವ ಪೀಳಿಗೆಗೆ ನೀವು ಒಂದು ಅದ್ಭುತ ಉದಾಹರಣೆಯಾಗಿರುವಿರಿ. ಅಭಿನಂದನೆಗಳು. ಈ ಕಾರ್ಯಕ್ರಮವನ್ನು ಸಾಧ್ಯವಾಗಿಸಿದ (ನನಗೆ ಇದರ ಕೊಂಡಿಯನ್ನು ಕಳುಹಿಸಿದವರೂ ಸೇರಿ)ಎಲ್ಲರಿಗೂ ನನ್ನ ಆದರ ಪೂರ್ವಕ ಧನ್ಯವಾದಗಳು👏👏👏 🕉️🌻भौतिक और लौकिकी प्रपंच मे ही डूबे आज के युवाओं के लिए आप एक अद्भुत उदाहरण है..... अभिनंदन। इस कार्यक्रम को जिन्होंने साध्य किया, जो इस के लिंक मुझे उपलब्ध कराया उनके समेत, उन सभी लोगों को मेरा सादर धन्यवाद।🌻💐🙏 👏👏👏
The best enlightening subject great work , Applaud to the whole team and my pranam to Dr.Parthosh. My suggestion to watch question no 34 it's great reply
This is so good. Understood so many concepts. Wish that you make more such videos to inspire my generation. You have used appropriate analogies and language to make us understand. Please continue making more such videos. Humble request. Thanks.
Firstly, namaste to both of you. I was extremely happy to watch the video and understand the concepts explained. It's a great source of learning for youngsters like us. I have a question : It was told that if your free will (ichcha) is strong then the resultant will tend towards that. My question is should I have an ichcha according to what I perceive or should I surrender thinking may the best thing happen. Why I am asking this is, sometimes what we think was right earlier and failed to materialize has later felt it didn't materialize for a good reason. So how exactly does this work. Thank you.
Krishna answers this in Geetha - TAsmaat Shastram PramaNam te karyaakarya vyavasthitau. This means, one should align his/her ichha in accordance to the Shastras (considered to be Sri Hari's commandments). In summary, one SHOULD have icchas that is in alignment to Shastras, as much as possible.
@@prathoshap5226 Namaste, thank you for the answer. I have a query. The Shastras are not uniform in telling us what is right. For example, desiring a good house is consistent with pursuing Artha and Kama purushartha as a householder, but this pursuit also takes us away from the company of bhaktas and thoughts of God into the race of the materials and Artha. How do we frame our ichhas in these situations?
Q37 @1:16:53 - Dr Prathosh says Jeeva and Ishwara are innately happy. However @1:17:47 he says it is not necessary that jeeva is innately happy. It is not clear, please clarify
Yes, while comparing the best of the jeevas with the supreme, the Jeeva with the highest of happiness - the highest of sattvik nature - pales in comparison with that of the Supreme's happiness which is never limited unlike ours. Later, when the topic of bad nature or svabhava comes up, it's clarified that it indeed exists and such jeevas' moksha would be radically different and it won't be that of happiness (although their prayatna or effort was to attain happiness). A simple example to understand it can be students attempting an examination. Although all students are after the same goal, the results (moksha) will reveal the failed students and the passed ones.
When is next conversation with Dr. Pratosh ? We can have sessions 1. How to start vedantic studies for different age people 2. General topics like how Hinduism will survive with constant attack from other religions 3. Role of Sanskrit
Will have to see when Dr. Prathosh will be available. I'll present these topic suggestions and see how it goes. Meanwhile, Shri Krishnarajacharya Kuthpadi is striving in the same direction. You can check out his work on youtube in JnanaGamya Prasarana Channel (Kannada only)
Sir I have a question on 'Self'. Does the jeeva enter in to another body as soon as it is released from the present one, or takes some time to do it. If so, what does it do in the intermittant period.
Shreeraagam The Garuda Purana goes into detail about the types of intermittent bodies the Jeeva takes before the next sthoola deha is taken and the process is dependent on the jeevas karmas too. This is a huge topic in itself and I would recommend going through Vid. Pushkarachar's lectures on Garuda Puarana.
@@VedicDiscourses Sure .. Thank you so much for the quick reply.. I have a lot of other doubts.. Will ask one by one.. This is a big platform for learning.. Excellent job .. Thanks a lot to you people..
First of all thank you very much for all the effort you have put here trying to answer very fundamental questions.. Beautiful and meaningful conversation with lot of practicality, need bit more of explanation on prayers, rituals and customs, what effects it has on our day to day life
Very nice explanation.. Thanks a lot.. I have some questions.. Only madhwa shashtra explains all the tricky questions, no doubt in that... But if think the other way, it's built on some pre-defined assumptions like 1) jeevatma is eternally associated with swabhava.. 2) only 1 paramaatma and infinite jeevatma... Isn't it like reverse engineered and fixed on some unquestionable assumptions as things getting more trickier? I believe "Harisarvottamatva" and seeking answers to my doubts.. 🙏
The shastras do not label any concept unquestionable. They encourage debate as a matter of fact - tad viddhi pranipatena pariprashnena sevaya Gita - 4.34. And, do not speak of anything that cannot be realized / verified. Just that some would need a little more tapas or discipline than others. Madhva shastra came at a point when there were atleast 21 prominent philosophies in practice and the bhashya presented by Sri Madhvacharya had to be proved against each of them. So, the concepts presented are extremely & thoroughly dissected & argued with practically zero assumptions made. It appears to have been reverse engineered :) because it beautifully answers the apparent contradictions in the shastras. In fact, that's actually how a bhashya is verified. It should not contradict the statements of the shastras. For the specific texts on why Paramatma is that one supreme and jeevas are that infinite infinitesimals and other derivations, Sri Jayatheertha's Nyaya Sudha, Sri Vadiraja's Yukti Mallika, Sri Vyasaraja's Chandrika, Sri Raghavendra Swami's Parimala & others are where the concepts are thoroughly dealt with, against contradicting arguments.
Really awesome the way video was presented with explanation.. I watched it initially when it got uploaded but looks like heavy modifications were done to improve one's understanding
I have few questions 1.Regarding the description of earth and brahmana in shastra do not match the present description of earth and universe how do we reconcile it 2. The concept of humans millions of years ago being civilised is contrary to the theory of evolution and archeological facts found how do we reconcile it
Regarding the first point, description of Earth and shastras - it does match with the current findings and you can find info on the net that goes into much details. The confusion lies in interpretations I believe. It's perhaps beyond the scope of this discussion. For more info, I would suggest going through content on other channels which delve deeper on the subject matter. Regarding the second point, concept of humans existence millions of years ago and the theory of evolution. Let me talk about the theory of evolution since I recently had looked into it. The shastras accept evolution but not in the sense of nature being independently intelligent to evolve - but rather in the sense of intelligence (belonging to life) being applied to evolve. For example, we perhaps can have seedless dates or apples or mangoes, when we systemically engineer & grow them so - which otherwise wouldn't happen naturally given millions of years. But what about the occasions where they do happen naturally, perhaps a mango with two seeds or a two headed snake or a calf? This too is accepted as not occurring naturally, but rather by intelligence (belonging to life) that's beyond our capacity to understand, owing to our limited sense perception. Regarding the concept of intelligent life that's a million years old. There are a lot of theories for & against it, that's been dealt with thoroughly on the net. I guess we can go through and decide for ourselves. It perhaps requires a video of its own to do justice.
Very enlightening. Given to understand that existence of Jeeva is characterised by Gnana, Iccha and Prayatna, how to ascertain that a person in 'Coma' has these three gunas? My profound regards to Dr. Pratosh and Dr. Shrikant.
Thank you for your kind words of appreciation. Regarding a person being in Coma, the Vedas speak of physical bodies that are subtler than the ones we see. Out of them, 3 are primary called the "linga", "anirudda" & "sthoola" (sthoola is the one we see). And these bodies do have the capacity to retain knowledge, capacity to act & desire. This is a very complex subject matter and I know that the answer doesn't even come close to explaining the how & the what. If you can understand Kannada, there's an excellent video by Dr. Prabhanjanacharya explaining this concept titled "Understanding Jeeva Svaroopa". On a side note, it's only Dr. Prathosh who has a PhD :)
Thank you for a fantastic discourse. I just have a question.....once jeeva attains Mokasha it will not come back...then, great saints such as Sri Raghavendra swamy, Sri Shridi Sai Baba, Sri Madvacharyaru the likes come back to earth even after Moksha in different forms in different era. Do they choose to come back or are they sent back to guide us. Thank you once again. 🙏💐🙏
Once a jeeva attains moksha, the jeeva doesn't take birth again, it is said. Then, what are the greats like Sri Rayaru doing here. Dr. Prabhanjanacharya explained this very well with an example. Imagine the ones who have attained moksha as people standing at the railway station with a reserved ticket in their hands. Rayaru and such 'aparoksha gnanis' fall under this category. They are here finishing up their 'prarabdha karma' with moksha ticket in their hands. The system is made so; otherwise common folk like us won't have anyone to guide us to moksha.
42:15 Isn't the innate nature a force by itself that acts on him? Isn't it the reason he steals? Also, if it is the innate nature that is a fixed attribute of the jeeva that makes people, by and large, do the things they do, why are criminals punished and high achieving humans celebrated? It's not in the human's (physical form) capability to completely reverse the effect of the innate nature right? So since the human follows the nature of the jeeva, can it be considered his free will's fault in doing so, and punishing him based on the rulebook the other jeevas made?
Very deeply worded. Taking the first point "Isn't the innate nature a force by itself that acts on him? Isn't it the reason he steals?" - Rather than seeing it as a force that acts upon the jeeva... it's something that's the jeeva himself. It's like a person committing a good or bad deed with absolutely no force upon him, out of his own free will, to which he gets rewarded or punished. No one is forcing the jeeva to have a nature that's against him (separating a jeeva's nature from the jeeva is as good as killing it, which no jeeva aspires for, when uninfluenced & unimpeded by other factors). If he is stealing out of pure nature (with other influences negated), it's purely out of his own desire, which he chose himself (the desire / choice is the nature... he is not bound by it, rather it is himself... it's not external to him). Getting to the second point, "if it's the innate nature that makes the jeeva do bad deeds, why punish him... it's not his fault". If done under the influence of other jeevas, or circumstances, yes, it won't fully be his fault. But, if the jeeva commits a crime out of his own free will, uninfluenced, & since the free will or innate nature or svabhava is him, he becomes responsible. Svabhava is something that cannot be separated from the jeeva. The jeeva ceases to be if it's taken out. The primary difference between a living & non living entity is iccha or desire or will, on which the jeeva does have control over. So, he (of that svabhava or that-natured entity) becomes responsible for his actions.
@@VedicDiscourses It took me some time to absorb the concept clearly, but now I am clear about it. Thank you for this video, and your prompt reply. This really made me curious to learn more about the dhvaitha siddhantha.
A very nice presentation of basic concepts. Only one thing I disagree. It is really a complex topic, but the siddhAnta is very clear and specific on this. There is absolutely no freewill for any Jiva. That is logical too as otherwise it implies ignorance for Ishvara.
Namaste Tadipatri ji - this term of free-will is quite loosely defined and not well-understood. Since you have been a great exponent of Shastras, I would want to elaborate my stand - Jeeva has Kartrutva but absolutely no Swantantrya. I'm sure you'll agree with this (please refer to Kartrutvadhikarana in Tatparya Chandrika for details). It is only that Jeeva has Natural Ichha which I called free-will (to distinguish between a jaDa puppet and Chetana Jeeva). There's absolutely no Swantantrya in whatever sense. In that sense, one may say Jeeva has will which isn't free (dependence on his own karma, swabhava and Ishwara). Hope this clarifies. Happy to discuss further. Humbly yours, Prathosha.
On Question 34, instead of why God needs our prayers it would be have been nice if the question said "If nobody can change the innate nature of the jeeva what is the purpose of prayers or offerings to gods. We have seen or heard situations change by offering services to god or by performing certain rituals. So what exactly are we praying for? ". I think Chapter 6 can make a whole episode on its own. But great episode overall, thank you.
Prayers are usually done to alter our karma. The question could be why would / should God alter a jeeva's karma on the basis of prayers. You are right. Chapter 6 can be elaborated into an episode of its own.
I don't get chance to learn and to give time to know our dharmic pustak...Many adharmic abrahmic inhumans try to demean our Ishwar and in this video neutrality and unbiased nature of Ishwar explain well..Thank you for this whole enlightening series keep exploring and awakening us by such simple way which is powerful and easily understood...
Sir, What is the definition of "coma state in icu"? where one cannot "know", "desire" or "act"? Is he dead or alive? does jeeva reside in a person who is in coma?
A comatose person is technically alive. And with life, there's always the acts of knowing & desiring even if it's not visible externally just like how a dreaming person would look inactive to an outsider.
Thanks for this wonderful session. It clarified a lot of questions I had. At 29:57, Dr. Pratosh says jeeva is not puppet. Then in that context what exactly is the meaning of the phrase "naham kartha hari kartha"? Please clarify.
Jeeva is not a puppet in the sense that jeeva has his free will, however minuscule & limited it may be. Jeeva by definition has kartrutva, the ability to do (along with gnana & iccha). But absolutely no svatantra - the ability to initiate anything outside of the choices made available to him. Often times, mixing up the terms kartrutva and svatantra is the cause of our contradictory interpretations. The Brahma Sutra verse 'karta shastrarthavathvaat om' states that jeeva is a karta, just that he is not the svatantra karta but rather an asvatantra karta. This is the meaning of the phrase 'Naham kartha hari kartha' - SriHari is that one independent kartha, not me.
@@VedicDiscourses thanks for the clarification. If innate nature of a jeeva doesn't change, how does a jeeva with "taamasa nature" gets moksha? Or it doesn't ever?
@@csmcsmyt the term moksha refers to - getting rid of everything that isn't the true nature. So in that sense, Tamasa jeevas do get "moksha" albeit not a blissful one. By definition, they'll be themselves (not a pleasurable self though)
@@VedicDiscourses one more clarification - the term "Free will" doesn't have a correct English translation. The summary of Shastric points on this topic is as follows - Jeeva definitely has Kartrutva (Gnyaana, ichha and kruti) and doesn't have Swantantrya (Anadhinatva). Hope it helps
@@prathoshap5226 What i have heard is that, the jeeva is made up of 3 things Sat-Chit-Ananda and so is Parmatma, & if jeeva is the pratibimba of Parmatma then even the Tamsic Jeevas too have the pratibimba of Parmatma in them, so my question is in case of Tamsic Jeevas what happens to the "Ananda" part when they attain liberation? Isn't Ananda ecstasy? Why is that the Tamsic Jeevas experience Dukha when they attain liberation?
Excellent explaination of madhwa tatwa pl keep some more episodes of such very interesting topics in madhwa philisophy . Can we relate this philosophy to writings of author Paul brunton Swamy Prabhupada etc pl some more programmes by dr pratosh dr Shanta desai
Thank you for your kind words. We did have a series planned on understanding the Bhagavad Geeta deeply. But it's getting postponed since a year on account of the pandemic.
Jeeva's innate characteristic is called Svabhava. Is Guna & Svabhava the same ? If that is the case then Guna's (Satva, Rajas, Tamas) can be changed, thus Svabhava can be changed over various life cycles.
Gunas can come and go but not svabhava. Gunas can cover a person’s svabhava. Gunas do change but not a jeeva’s identity. Jeeva is distinguished by his svabhava, which can never change although covered by gunas. This is an excellent topic to take up in an upcoming video. I’ll see if that’s possible.
I have some doubts and I appreciate if answered 1. How does the kundalini energy mentioned in lalita sahasranama fit here? A lot of texts like Tirumanthiram, Hatha Yoga Pradipika, Shiva Samhita, Gheranda Samhita etc talk about this powerful energy. Some modern rishis like Vivekananda go to the extend of saying the whole reason one has certain high experiances is because of this energy called Kundalini. 2. Dwaita though doesn’t talk about Kundalini talks about Vishnu Sarvotamatatva and the complete devotion to God Vishnu who is the All Pervader. Also Shri Madhwacharya puts the Brahmanda Purana(Lalita Sahasranama falls here) into Rajasic Puranas. Does it imply that Kundalini energy or whatever techniques that deal with raising this energy is acknowledged by Dwaita system to be Rajasic and are hence created for the purpose of confusion implying that these doesn’t exist? Also meaning that whoever reached that state where Sahasrara is told to be awakened is in a delusional state? Also in all the yogic cases, pranayama is given a very high priority. And the same pranayama exists in Sandhya Vandhana. So why is there a similarity in the exercise when the only purana that deals with Kundalini is meant to be delusional or Rajasic. 3. Even though specific prayers in temples mentioned in the video though can be refuted by the statement in Bhagavatam by Prahlada as in the video, I see some temples in Kerala meant for specific actions like VishnuMaya Chathan temple(en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avanangattilkalari_Vishnumaya_Temple) which deals with praying to a deity who upon satisfied will grant as per the prayer even if it means endangering the life of an another person. In that case, what is that deity? Is it a Jeeva or is it another form of Supreme Vishnu as per dwaita or do we have devils in our system? My previous colleague(I trust him to be honest and so take his experiences seriously) was from the temple family and his view on his experience was that God in Temple exists to answer the specific prayers for the temple. I don't want to challenge that deity to know if it exists as I'm told for certainty that it can be challenged and the bad results can be known quick :) 4. Of people who are mentally challenged, how will they attain moksha without a godly intervention as most of them from my direct experience do not know what they're doing. Or is it that they're deemed to be Tamasic souls as per dwaita and cannot be brought back? Because they cannot be forced to pray god for help due to their mental limitations on being sincere to devotion. As an explorer, I'd like to see if all these dots can be connected to a satisfactory level. Please correct if I got anything factually wrong. Thanks
I have not done my research on kundalini / Vivekananda's thoughts on it or its reference in Lalita Sahasranama. You have made many specific references which I am not aware of. I'll talk about it with a few people and see if someone well qualified can answer these queries. That part seems a little scary - the temple in Kerala that you are mentioning. And interesting; I wasn't aware of that. Yes, I am with you in standing clear of challenging any deities :) Let me try to answer the 4th point - how do mentally challenged people do their sadhane as they don't even have the tools to do so. They most probably won't. Not in this birth atleast. The karma that we undergo is a result of our previous actions and they will last as long as they need to, until the last experience of the result is had. Once it's done, the jeeva will certainly be able to resume his sadhana or jignasa. The challenged jeeva might not necessarily be of a tamasic nature. Satvic jeevas can undergo bad reactions too as a result of misled deeds of the past done under the influence of karma and prakruti, and a bit of their will. Let me ask around regarding the other interesting points raised.
balajiachar tamraparni True. The last chapter deserves a video of its own to fully understand the subject matter. I will discuss with Dr. Prathosh & see if we can take it up.
Sirs, Namaste ! Indeed great session and an eye opener episode. I am a tiny "jeeva" who has a lot of questions in mind but not knowing where to start. As I have to, so that I shall get some light, wanted to know if the innate nature of a jeeva is " being confused" how can that jeeva come out of this ? This jeeva knows that he has to come out of this confusion and trying hard as well .Now u mention tat even Paramatma will not touch upon the innate nature of a jeeva, how this jeeva could help himself? Or who shall help him? Is there a way? I am greatly confused. Pls help to clarify.
An excellent thought provoking instance - what if the innate nature of the jeeva is to be eternally confused. So, by definition, that jeeva is always confused. The jeeva gets every opportunity to get out of it, but at every opportunity, that jeeva chooses (this word is significant) to stay confused. Out of its own free will, the jeeva keeps choosing to stay in confusion. That innate nature isn't a boon or a curse to the jeeva, but rather it is the jeeva itself. The jeeva isn't shackled by its innate nature, but rather those "shackles" define the jeeva such that removing the shackles is equivalent to destroying that very jeeva - which Paramatma never does. This question, as to how such a jeeva can get out of such a condition, is something that a person outside of such confusion can conclusively ask. The jeeva who is eternally confused will be in confusion about even knowing if he's confused and would therefore never conclusively ask anyone to get him out of confusion. I have answered to the best of my knowledge.
@@VedicDiscourses .. Sir, Thanks for your response. I think I should equip myself more to a state where in I can clearly be able to understand this confusion. In fact, I am in the process of it. I shall seeking your advises in future as well. Thanks for your time and for your amazing efforts towards this service.
For this question sri bannanje govindacharyara has given answers. Pls watch swabhava prabhava by bannanje govindachary. It is about genetic force and environmental force .
Thank you for the video. I can’t understand how the innate nature of the jiva can be “miserable”. If the jiva a minuscule part of Isvara and therefore has His qualities in minuscule quantities? Can a svabhava really be miserable? Please comment :-)
Let's go through the first point as to how a jeeva's nature could be that of misery. We all know that every jeeva wants happiness. Even a tiny ant walks towards sugar and walks away from fire. Happiness is what every jeeva seeks. However, the means to happiness vary according to the individual traits of the jeeva. Combine that with free will and the jeeva can choose certain actions over others. It's these choices that determine the path to happiness that the jeeva takes. Certain actions of the jeeva, even though done for his happiness, lead to misery. Given a choice, certain jeevas always choose questionable means to their happiness which makes them perpetually miserable, out of their own free will (keeping the circumstantial influences aside for now). Such jeevas are what we refer to as having a miserable nature. Note that such jeevas don't even aspire to change. It's the most natural of states for them to be in and they do not see any fault in that, even though it's leading to misery. It's only the good natured jeevas that want to "save" them. Coming to the second point that the jeeva is a part of Isvara - this is true in the sense that there's absolute dependency on Isvara; the jeeva is absolutely dependent on Isvara for everything, including his own immortality. And there's similarities in the sense that Isvara is a living entity, and so is the jeeva. But the similarities end there. That Absolute is a different species altogether, unlike anything we have ever seen or experienced. The jeeva is not a part of Isvara as in hands are parts of our body; but rather, the jeeva is a part of Isvara as in a pet is part of a family, for example.
The Shruti Statement also says, Ayam Atma Brahma !! " Verily, this Atman is Brahman." So, I want to know the interpretation from Tattva-vada's point of view.Plz Hari Hari
The statement अयम् आत्मा ब्रह्म from माण्डूक्य is referring to the Brahman himself. To give a simple example, the phrase 'ayam purushah Srikanthaha' would mean 'This person is Srikanth' while pointing to that person. Likewise, this atman is brahman (pointing to the Supreme and not the jeeva). For a detailed and thorough proof of such statements from the Tattva vada point of view, Shri Sathyadhyana Theertha's works (in Sanskrit & Kannada) serve as excellent resources.
@@VedicDiscourses Prabhu, One more doubt: Sriman Madhvacarya says that the Jivas are different from Ishvara from all respects.But in Bhagavad Gita 15.15 we find Lord Sri Krishna saying: Mamaivamsho jeevo loke jiva bhute sanatanah i.e. The Jivas are eternal parts of Him(Ishvara).Does Tattvavada also recognises that Atma is anu and Paramatma is Vibhu just like Ramanujacarya said?? Plz dispel my doubt🙏🏼🙏🏼 Also thanks for the above answer😊
@@soumyabratasahoo3649 Glad to discuss 🙏🏼 The statement ममैवांशो जीवलोके जीवभूत: सनातन: refers to the jeevas as part of Ishwara in the sense that the very existence of the jeevas is because of that Ishwara without whom the jeevas wouldn't be eternal - Bhagavata 2.10.12 - द्रव्यं कर्म च कालश्च स्वभावो जीव एव च यदनुग्रहतः सन्ति न सन्ति यदुपेक्षया . The jeevas are a part of the Lord in the sense that a pet is a part of a family and not as in a hand is part of the body. The jeevas are very much minuscule compared to the immeasurable ocean that is the Paramatma who takes the anu/vibhu forms as He desires fit.
@@VedicDiscourses Thanks Thanks Prabhu for clearing my doubts.It's my humble request if it's poasible to make euch congenial videos on Bhagavad Gita sessions.😊😄🙏🏼🙏🏼
This is an excellent topic. Let me take this to Dr Prathosh. If you have specific questions or topics on the Bhashya, do mail them to me at vedic.discourses@gmail.com . We are currently listing out the topics to be covered and a session on the Bhashya would be appropriate. Thanks.
There are already a great many lectures about jeeva svaroopa, svabhava, karma and moksha in Kannada. You can look up Sri Prabhanjanacharyaru's lectures. We chose English so that the knowledge is accessible even by people who speak Tamil, Telugu, Marati, Hindi etc.
🕉️ @12:54...ತಿಳಿಯುವ-ಇಚ್ಛಿಸುವ ಮತ್ತು ಪ್ರಯತ್ನಿಸುವ ಲಕ್ಷವುಳ್ಳವು ಜೀವಗಳು ಎನ್ನುವುದಾದರೆ.... ಸಸ್ಯಗಳು ಏನು.... ಅವು ಬೆಳೆಯುವುವು, ಉತ್ಪತ್ತಿ ಮಾಡುವುವು ಮತ್ತು ಪ್ರಯತ್ನ (ಕೆಲವು ಕತ್ತರಿಸಿದ ಮೇಲೂ ಚಿಗುರುವ) ಪ್ರಯತ್ನ ಮಾಡುವುವು.... ಅವು ತಿಳಿಲಾರವು ಎಂದುಕೊಂಡಿರುವೆ...... ತಿಳಿಯಬಲ್ಲವೇ!?
Traditionally we have three major explanations for this creation -- Adwaita, Vishishtadwaita, and Dwaita. But we should remember that finally what you experience is the ultimate test of truth. Explanation of truth is impossible. Therefore in all schools of thought there will always be a question about this creation which cannot be answered by applying logic. One may choose one of the schools of thought mentioned above that satisfies him/her.
I'm tired of performing kaamya karma. I'm not getting even a peace of mind. If I perform nishkaama karma will god take responsibility of my material life??
The whole idea of nishkama karma is to just perform duties and ignore the outcomes. God is not duty bound to "take care" of our material comforts. He just protects our karmic accounts.
Humble pranams to both of you. I have few questions. 1.Why do we ask, dhiyo yonaha prachodayat? Here we are asking for sat buddhi. Even chamakam of, tatriyopanishat we ask for for vrihiyashcha me, mashaashchame, tilaaschame. So isn't it praying god? 2.Why must we surrender to god? 3.Also Pls enlighten further on Prayatna. Thanks and namskaras again. Excellent interview.
Namaskaragalu. Taking the first question, that is, the gayatri mantra "Dhiyo yona: prachodayat" falls under the type of prayer made to get out of the karmic cycle towards moksha and are most welcome. Prayers by themselves are not good or bad but when prayers are taken with their intentions, they make up good or bad prayers. So, the Gayatri mantra is most welcome and in fact one of our prescribed duties. The second question perhaps needs a discussion on its own. Prayatna too is a fairly complex subject matter. We'll see if we can take it up. Thank you.
Our prayer is only to realise our potential and God according to our potential. When we say dhiyo yo Naha prachodayat, we are not asking God, we are remembering god's power to open up our potential that's all
But how can someone be said to be inately evil when even the worst kind of people have kindness and goodness inside them? Can it not be possible by the association of the jeeva with prakriti he develops the kind of chitta that might cause him to steal or harm? Isn't it possible that the nature is never set in stone but can be changed as seen in many people before?
The first point is answered in Q20. To elaborate on that, this classification of them being innately evil or good is very subjective. One nation's terrorist is another nation's patriot. So, assuming that we are talking about good & bad nature in accordance with the Vedas, it is true that a person who is mostly classified as evil can have good qualities - just that his bad qualities overshadow the good ones. At the same time, there can be people with the worst of qualities with absolutely no good qualifications - jeevas are infinite - so, such jeevas are in existence too, even if we haven't come across them - just as we might not have come across absolutely good jeevas. To the second point. Absolutely possible. In fact, our scriptures emphasize that the innate nature of a jeeva can never be factually determined, because of karma & prakruthi. Only liberated jeevas are not under the influence of prakruti. It's very much possible that good natured jeevas commit heinous questionable acts because of the influence of prakruti & karma. There are a good many examples in Mahabharata & Ramayana. About the third point. Svabhava or innate nature defines the jeeva. The innate nature is the jeeva himself, which is inseparable from him. It's part of his identity or rather it is him. For example, if sugar isn't sweet or milk isn't white, it's most probably not sugar or milk. If the quality of sweetness or the color of milk is taken out of it, it is no longer sugar / milk. So, if nature is something that can be separated from the jeeva, it's not his nature, but rather something that was an influence (karma / prakruthi). Keeping this in mind, when we see bad deeds committed by a jeeva who is by and large, a good person, such acts are most probably done under the influence of past karma / prakruthi and most probably not something associated with innate nature. However, as stated before, we are in no position to determine the nature of a jeeva for a fact. We can only make a guess.
So if the ratio of jeeva to body is 1:1, and jeeva always existed, then where were these jeevas residing before they took the form of the bodies in an expanding population!
The jeevas are said to reside within one of the forms of the Lord. Imagine a bag of seeds held by a farmer, about to be sown. And the population need not be ever expanding. Non-human species of life should also be considered.
Please interview bannanje govindacharya.. his point of view of Svabhava is quite different.. it's not freewill.. & to say God is just an inspirer or preraka, doesn't have anything to do with actions is completely against the tenets of Tatva vada. God as sarvakarta is major portion of the philosophy
Namaskaragalu. I don't think Dr. Prathosh implies that God only stops at prerane. God is sarvakarta as you rightly said. At the same time, the jeeva isn't a puppet either. Jeevas have kartrutva in spite of God being sarvakarta. I don't think Dr. Prathosh's statements contradict Dr. Bannanje's in any way in terms of svabhava & free will. Let me know the exact statements of Bannanje / Dr. Prathosh that seem to be in contradiction and I'll be happy to take it up further.
Firstly, thanks for such an enlightening post. I appreciate the questions and the answers from these Jeevas 😂. I have a doubt, In Q23 & 25 I have a doubt. In the answer to Q23 @ about the 50th min, he says there are jeevas whose innate nature is not happiness. In Q25 we are are getting rid of Karma and Prakriti's influence to attain moksha by using the innate nature. So there is a bit of contradiction that in Q23 it seems like some cannot attain moksha and in Q25 it seems like everyone can attain moksha? Pl explain.
True. There are jeevas who continue to always (out of their own free will, without external influences) make choices that result in misery. Moksha is nothing but removing the karmic & prakriti influences to enjoy pure nature - which happens to be that of misery for such jeevas. There was a nice example that was given in this regard. Moksha can be thought of as passing out of a university - as a graduate or as a failure is up to the student or jeeva. But every student eventually leaves (attains moksha) the university.
It is said Soul is changeless how can different souls have different svabhava..... I think svabhava is of the mind because soul is changeless acc to BG. How can there be jivas who will eternally live in hell??
Namaste, Soul is changeless - True, when talking of the pure soul devoid of any material afflictions. If soul is changeless, how can different souls have different svabhava? - The two are not mutually exclusive... Different souls have different svabhavas, that do not change. I think svabhava is of the mind - Different minds do have different properties or svabhavas - not talking about jeeva svabhava or the properties of the pure soul which is non-different from the soul; but talking about the svabhava or material properties of the mind that is ever changing according to the environment and circumstances it is in. How can there be jeevas who will eternally live in hell? This is not too hard to understand. We see life-imprisonment & capital punishment awarded by the best of learned judges. There will always be jeevas who irrespective of favorable circumstances/inspiration, will always choose (out of their own free will, without force or obligations) to do what is deemed as bad or wrong. Such persons deserve different environment/rules away from the regular jeevas who are here for their sadhana. We see good souls begging life-imprisonment for serial offenders and judges do favor such petitions if the offenders repeatedly choose such a path. Its important to understand that such choices are not imposed upon the offenders but taken voluntarily out of their own will... that is, they are choosing to be what they are, in spite of every opportunity offered otherwise.
What is the scriptural evidence that one soul is different from another? And in general scriptural evidence for Panch Bheda Different natures of living beings can be explained by mind also.
@@saurabhkamat1928 Namaste. You seem to be putting forth the monistic theory. For a fairly exhaustive debate on monistic vs dualistic points of view with scriptural references, you can refer to Surendranath Dasgupta's A History of Indian Philosophy and for a more accurate understanding of dualism with references & arguments, a recent publication of Sabha Sara Sangraha (kannada) by Sri Satyadhyana Theertha is helpful.
In that book of Indian philosophy there is not much mention of dvaita system. Kannada in don't understand I just want you to quote 2 or 3 verses from shastra/upanishads where it directly or indirectly says difference between 2 jivas (one bheda out of the panch bhedas)
@@saurabhkamat1928 Putting forth a few verses from the Gita (not exhaustive):- BG 8.20 - परस्तस्मात्तु भावोऽन्योऽव्यक्तोऽव्यक्तात्सनातनः। यः स सर्वेषु भूतेषु नश्यत्सु न विनश्यति।। There exists another eternal who is not destroyed when all beings are destroyed. Here, if the word avyakta is treated to be something material or impersonal or a property of the manifest jeeva, it's cleared up in the next verse. BG 8.21 - अव्यक्तोऽक्षर इत्युक्तस्तमाहुः परमां गतिम्। यं प्राप्य न निवर्तन्ते तद्धाम परमं मम।। That which is the imperishable, that which is the highest goal which on reaching, a jeeva would not come back into this manifest reality, that is my abode. Avyakta -> Akshara -> Parama gati -> My abode -> Krishna's abode BG 15.16 द्वाविमौ पुरुषौ लोके क्षरश्चाक्षर एव च। क्षरः सर्वाणि भूतानि कूटस्थोऽक्षर उच्यते।। In this world are two categories - the kshara (fallible) and akshara (infallible). Kshara are the sarvani bhutani - all beings with material bodies (subjected to birth & death), and the other who is above the cycle of birth and death. The divisions made are among chetanas or living entities and not between matter & chetana or between the purusha & his energy/maya (as theorized by some schools of thought). Another point to be noticed is the plural used for jeevas - bhootani, meaning jeevas are many, who are different from that uttama purusha (next verse). BG 15.17 उत्तमः पुरुषस्त्वन्यः परमात्मेत्युदाहृतः। यो लोकत्रयमाविश्य बिभर्त्यव्यय ईश्वरः।। That uttama purusha is different (anyaH)... BG 2.12 न त्वेवाहं जातु नासं न त्वं नेमे जनाधिपाः। न चैव न भविष्यामः सर्वे वयमतः परम्।। Never was a time when I, you or all the adhipas or kings, did not exist. And there will never be a time when we will stop existing. Here, one can argue that Krishna is referring to the distinct bodies of the same self. If so, the bodies surely didn't exist before, and neither will they exist after death - so, definitely not referring to the diversity of bodies. If referring to the same soul within bodies, it implies that the identity of you, me, them will always exist - liberation or not, implying the difference even after eikya (or monistic moksha), which doesn't seem to hold, if eikya moksha / avidya naasha is considered. Furthermore, throughout the second chapter (2.13, 18, 17, 20, 21, 23, 24 etc), the jeeva's permanence is put forth. Which means, that the jeeva, that identity which makes him a jeeva, holds true eternally (avikara - unchanging svaroopa), which would not be the case if we consider eikya in moksha. One can argue that the avikara self is manifest in diverse vikaras (to us) due to maya or avidya. But, that theory doesn't seem to hold when it is examined against jeeva's svaroopa characteristics (which would directly contradict eikya moksha). These are just a few pages (about 5-8) taken from Sabhasaara Sangraha of Sri Sathyadhyana Theertha. The book is 900 pages long, dealing with many more interesting points & contradictions among theories (not limited to monistic theories) as a series of questions and answers. It's unfortunate that it's only available in Kannada. I hope it gets an english translation. That said, there is a lot more to discuss. There are many more interesting arguments put forth by Sri Appayya Deekshita, and counter arguments by Sri Vijayeendra Theertha and the debates between the different schools of thought have been ongoing since atleast the 12th century - so many granthas put forth by the different schools. So, definitely a few comments here cannot do justice to such a great debate. I intend to make a series of videos on the different schools of thought including the non-vedic & abrahamic & atheistic schools of thought in a few years time. If in need of an in-depth & authentic technical analysis in English, I would recommend the works of Sri BNK Sharma. Especially, the books - The Brahmasutras and Their Principal Commentaries and History of the Dvaita School of Vedānta and Its Literature - both available in online and hardbound versions (Motilal Banarsidass Publications).
Some questions: 1) Moksha is subjective ? If innate nature cannot be changed and if somebody's innate nature is to violate the code, Moksha for that jeeva would be to continue violating the code ? This Moksha is same as Moksha of another jeeva whose innate nature is to follow the code ? Not clear. 2) Dr Prathosh says there is nothing good or bad in absolute sense. Yet the verse he quoted from Gita shows Lord Krishna condemning some jeevas as "Adhama". Not clear. 3) By taking a rigid position that "Swabhava" cannot be changed, Dr Prathosh shuts down any possibility of transformation. That's same as Christian notion of eternal damnation after judgement day.
If Moksha isn't subjective, every jeeva will eventually end up in the same space irrespective of how the jeeva conducted himself in this world. The instructions, the do's and don'ts would be useless as the jeeva's destiny will anyhow be fixed. This isn't the view of the Vedas. The Vedas attribute free will, a choice for every jeeva to make his own destiny. Coming to the second point that since nature or svabhava (not to be confused with the everyday term of nature - svabhava is the identity of the jeeva irrespective of his current existential nature that's temporary and transient) cannot be changed, can there be jeevas who violate the code (assuming code is the do's and don'ts of scriptures)? Yes, certainly. Since every jeeva has free will, he is given a choice to accept or reject at will. However, as stated previously, according to the code (the Vedas), such jeevas will not end up with the jeevas who followed the code. Here, the term moksha needs to be made clear - think of moksha as graduation / exit. Does every student graduate? Yes, every student eventually exits - can pass with flying colors, can just pass or can fail too. Graduation or exit is moksha. The college / examination is not doing anything more than evaluating whatever the student's capacity is and is only certifying that student's capability. So, the students who fail (the bad svabhava jeevas) are not forced to fail by the university. On the contrary, every student is given an equal opportunity to excel. Out of his or her own choices, the student becomes responsible for his merit. The same applies here. Good or bad is very much subjective when you consider different sources of truths to distinguish good or bad. One country's terrorist is another country's martyr. Keeping this in mind, there is something that can be resolutely classified as good, given that we all agree with the same rules of code - the Vedas, as you pointed out from the Gita. Lord Sri Krishna takes the standpoint of the Vedas and classifies jeevas as Uttama & Adhama based on the Vedas. At the same time, there was Duryodhana who would classify himself as Uttama from his own standpoint. About the third point, Svabhava is the nature of the jeeva - which is not forced upon him - this is rather the jeeva himself. The jeeva will change if he wants to change and that change is something that cannot be forced on the jeeva. There is possibility of transformation if the jeeva is willing to do so. There's free will for every jeeva. If you consider the bad natured jeevas, these are jeevas that are absolutely resolute in making the choices that they make, not out of force, but out of their own free will and are not willing to change, out of their own free will. No one is forcing them to change / or to not change. Coming to the point of eternal damnation, the last chapters of the Gita too speak of eternal damnation in the sense that such jeevas who always make the choices that make them suffer are never going to make the choices that get them out of their suffering, out of their own free will - no one is going to force them to make the choices leading to their misery. Such jeevas put themselves eternally in misery. To give a simple example, a habitual gambler continues to pour in his money and continues to lose out on every rupee years after years out of his own free will, without anyone forcing him to do so, thereby condemning himself to that state and no amount of 'change' forced upon him by good-natured jeevas can get him to change, unless he himself wills so.
@@VedicDiscourses Dear Sir/madam. 1) So you say Moksha is subjective & for a jeeva whose innate nature is to defy God's codes, his "Moksha" would be to reach eternal hell! Sounds funny...😁 I am saying it in a lighter sense...it makes good comedy... 2) An enemy soldier is martyr in his mother country but a Terrorist is Martyr nowhere!! Definitely not in principle. A rapist is definitely wrong, isn't it ? It is this principle that's universal, right ? How are you then saying there is nothing good or bad & it's all obeying or disobeying codes ? Are you trying to sound accommodative ? 3) The left side traffic analogy is nowhere close in magnitude, gravity & severity to the "codes" of God. God's codes become universal right ? Otherwise how can some jeevas be "Adhama" ? When Lord Krishna is saying some jeevas are Adhama, is God's view point mere individualistic ? Not universal ? After all He is God! 3) What you are saying without saying is that God's codes are indeed universal and goal is to discover if we are aligned with them or not, am I right ? Then I think you should stop saying there is nothing really good or bad as you did in first part of the talk.
@@jayalakshmammatumminakatte9395 I am going through your points one by one. I don't get the humor in the first point. Taking the same university example as before, no student aims to fail. But his choices inevitably lead there. About the second point, the example is to show that the book of codes that decide on who is good / bad can change depending on what the jeeva is choosing - thereby making the principle subjective. The third point - how can there be any other set of codes to distinguish good / bad while the Lord himself is declaring in the Gita. In this statement, the source of truth to classify the jeevas is the Lord / Gita / Vedas, which is correct. So, Lord Krishna and every other jeeva who follows the Lord would classify the jeevas likewise - no arguments there. However, according to the jeevas who follow a set of rules other than the Gita / Vedas / Lord, they can absolutely say otherwise based on their texts of truths / opinions that go against the Vedas / Gita. That point is acknowledged here with the traffic analogy. I didn't really get the last point. Feel free to drop a mail for further discussions on the subject matter. Mail id: vedic.discourses@gmail.com
It is a very good attempt in explaining Vedic philosophy through Acharya Madhva's views. But superficial explanation of many things are not fully satisfying. 1) The concept that nothing is absolutely right or wrong and depends on place and circumstances (example of driving car in different countries) is not correct. The example does not hold good for universal truths. Right or Wrong has to be decided on the basis of Shaastras ( ಸದಾಗಮ) . Unfortunately there are dozens of interpretation of the ಸದಾಗಮಾs and every achaarya or their followers claim only their interpretation is correct. Does it mean followers of other Achaaryas have no hope of salvation? 2) God's prerane was compared to a voltage source. It was also claimed that all jeevas have free will. It was mentioned that God does not interfere in anything to do with karma or free will or circumstances but only acts as a source of energy just like a battery connected to a fan or a bulb. Actually God is much more than a voltage source and there is nothing called free will. Everything happens through the Will of God. God first wills and therefore we will (ಬಿಂಬ ಪ್ರತಿಬಿಂಬ ಭಾವ) . Without his Will not even a blade of grass moves. To give an example, earthquakes happen because God willed it to happen and not because Earth willed it. So God not only created this universe but directly controlling and interfering and micromanaging it so to say. He will never give Freedom to anyone and as per shastras, we should not desire freedom. Even Mahalakshmi or liberated souls do not have freedom. So where is the question of free will? 3) The concept of ಅನಾದಿ ಕರ್ಮ is intriguing. Even the concept of infinite jeevas is not fully satisfactory. What exactly is meant by infinite number of jeevas? Eternally growing number of jeevas?? How did jeeva have karma before one fine day God decided to give it "janma"? Did it do karma only through the medium of linga shareera? How is it possible? Even assuming that it did, it must have been through prerane of God only. I honestly think lot of tough questions are brushed aside under the mysterious concepts of Anaadi Karma and Anantha jeevaru ideas. 4) It also looks like , at a time, God catches hold of some jeevas, makes them go through cycle of birth and death and at the end of kalpa "liberates"them. Then again, he brings in fresh set of jeevas. Which jeeva he chooses is again known only to God. The question is why doesn't God complete this exercise for all jeevas in one go unless number of jeevas are continuously increasing every second? 5) It was also mentioned that God does not interfere with our Karma but just acts as a source of EMF. But shastras say that after bhagavad aparoksha (ಬಿಂಬ ಸಾಕ್ಷಾತ್ಕಾರ), all sanchita and agaami karmaas are destroyed or made ineffective. Also it is a practical experience that prayers reduce the intensity of prarabda karma. 6) It is said that even after aparoksha, one has to suffer prarabda karma before moksha but only protected from sanchita and aagaami. Why?? Also it is said that ಕೃಷ್ಣಾರ್ಪಣ ಬುದ್ಧಿ ಯಿಂದ ಮಾಡಿದ ಕೆಲಸಕ್ಕೆ, ಕರ್ಮ ಲೇಪ ಇರಲ್ಲ ಅಂತಾರೆ. What is the rational explanation for this? Thanks and regards.
Please send a mail to prathoshap@gmail.com with this set of points. Please do include me in the cc (vedic.discourses@gmail.com) so that I can consolidate and paste the conversation here for the benefit of all after the discussion.
I appreciate this, but if you would have explained your field what you have actually studied that would be better. Some of things you explained are not proven, and is people have different opinions. Example Dwait, Adwait people says their philosophy is proved beyond doubt but still Dwait, Adwait and Vishtadwait still there, all are different opinion, but all 3 followers failed to prove thier philosophy. But what you have studied is proven, reproducible, until unless you can't show, prove, or reproduce what you said, it is difficult understand.
Regarding what Dr Prathosh has studied, I think I have covered it in the intro at the beginning. Could you be a bit more specific on what unproven concepts you are referring to? Every philosophy claims to be the true path. It’s up to us to go through the debates and decide for ourselves. We do have our free will. There’s abundant texts in each of the schools of Vaidika Mathas written over the past 6-8 centuries. I do have plans to make video series on a detailed comparison of the main tenets of the vaidika philosophies. Not sure when it’ll materialise.
Regarding proof of philosophy, I think they have put forth solid arguments in their favour - no shortage of texts here, since the past 6-8 centuries. Such a debate on the schools of thought is out of scope for the topic taken up in this video.
Adwait, Dwait, Vishistadwait, and other different philosophy all are arguing, saying that "our philosophy is valid one", rest of the philosophies are not valid, then probably one may be valid or may not be, or all are valid(because all are argued). Until unless proven, reproducible,everyone able to see it, every one able to learn. experience it, feel it, then that philosophy difficult to understand. Coming to science, technology and maths, here none of the field argue "our field valid one".every field here it is proven, reproducible,everyone able to see it, every one able to learn it. experience it, feel it, hence no question of argument.
Argument or argument debate or set of argument text not required when "it is proven, reproducible,everyone able to see it, every one able to learn it. experience it, feel it"
@@AJ-fo3hp "Adwait, Dwait, Vishistadwait, and other different philosophy all are arguing, saying that "our philosophy is valid one" - True. As part of our jignasa, we go through their arguments and determine for ourselves as to what's right. We have our will. "Coming to science, technology and maths, here none of the field argue "our field valid one".every field here it is proven, reproducible,everyone able to see it, every one able to learn it." - I'm afraid the tenets of proving philosophical concepts is drastically different from the tools used to prove/disprove mathematical concepts. Mainly because the subject of debate is beyond sense perception. Regarding reproducibility and experience, that indeed is done and is the basis for one's acceptance or dismissal of philosophy. We can perhaps take a material example for this - for a person to have "faith" in yoga, one needs to put in a good diet, dedicate some time and effort in practicing yoga with good sleeping habits to actually experience the benefits of what's promised. Similarly, there's a way of thought, a way of learning, a procedure that requires a dedicated effort to experience what's promised - different with different schools of thought. As the popular saying goes - the proof of the pudding is in the eating. We are intelligent enough to decide for ourselves. But can we have a scientific tool to just put the concept under a test - say a litmus test that turns blue on being right? Definitely not. Given our tools of knowledge, philosophy is seeking out someone who's far far beyond our senses of taste, smell or sight. Regarding proofs in philosophical evaluation, I would recommend Pramana Paddhati, an excellent treatise on what constitutes or what's acceptable as proof, given our state of senses & knowledge.
Till date, I have never come across any satisfactory sanskrit equivalent to the word 'free will'. Whether we have free will or not is a question that seems to arise only with the learning of the English language! Iccha shakti and Kartatva cant be satisfactorily regarded as free will. Moreover, its not a true surrender to God if one still wishes to latch onto even the concept of free will.
Index:-
*Chapter 1: The Self*
03:48 Q1 What am I?
06:42 Q2 Is there a way to see the jeeva?
08:04 Q3 How is the jeeva related to the body?
09:07 Q4 When did we come into existence?
09:46 Q5 How can one perceive eternity in an ephemeral environment?
11:26 Q6 How can one determine the existence of a jeeva within a body?
16:25 Q7 What happens to the jeeva when the body ends?
17:09 Summary
*Chapter 2: Actions & Reactions*
17:44 Q8 On what basis does the jeeva take another body?
18:07 Q9 What is Karma?
18:58 Q10 In terms of a jeeva, what can the reactions be?
20:22 Q11 Does karma exist only to decide on a jeeva's next body?
22:57 Q12 Do we have free will?
30:19 Summary
*Chapter 3: Innate Nature of a Jeeva*
31:10 Q13 What do you mean by innate nature?
33:08 Q14 Is the innate nature of a jeeva something that's given or passed around?
34:16 Q15 How do I ensure that my actions stay good?
36:10 Q16 Is every action subjective?
38:22 Q17 How can we ensure that every jeeva does good deeds?
40:00 Q18 Can jeevas be made to desire in a certain way so that they only incur positive reactions?
41:08 Q19 Since svabhava cannot be changed, doesn't that condemn a bad natured jeeva to bad actions & reactions?
42:40 Q20 Do good natured jeevas always choose (using their free will) to do good deeds?
46:17 Summary
*Chapter 4: Concept of Liberation*
47:10 Q21 When does the cycle of continuous actions & reactions end?
48:21 Q22 Why should a jeeva aspire to get rid of karma & prakruthi?
49:18 Q23 Are there jeevas who by nature are miserable?
50:20 Q24 Aren't such bad natured jeevas condemned to suffer?
51:25 Q25 Is getting rid of karma & prakruthi termed as liberation or moksha?
53:18 Q26 Is liberation final for a jeeva or can the jeeva get bound again after liberation?
54:11 Summary
*Chapter 5: Role of Eshwara*
54:37 Q27 How does a jeeva liberate himself?
56:06 Q28 What is the role of Eshwara in all this?
57:46 Q29 Why has the Lord created an imperfect world?
01:02:33 Q30 What is the Lord getting out of all this?
01:04:23 Q31 Can the Lord change the innate nature of the jeevas?
01:06:08 Q32 Why is He God and not a jeeva like you or me?
01:06:57 Summary
*Chapter 6: Association*
01:07:52 Q33 What does association mean?
01:09:25 Q34 Why does God require our prayers?
01:13:06 Q35 Are prayers useless?
01:14:58 Q36 Can the jeevas become God themselves by association?
01:16:16 Q37 Can jeevas become Gods after moksha?
01:17:51 Q38 How can one be spiritual practically?
01:21:22 Summary
Nice flow of thoughts on a topic..which is a tough nut to crack
I am really happy that educated youngsters like him are carrying forward the Madhva sampradaya
This is just brilliant !!!! I have been listening to Shri Bannanje Govindacharyas pravachanas for several years .. this 1hour plus conversation is just summary of that. Btw conversation process is excellent
Fundamental questions are clarified in a simplified manner not complicating too much. Pratosh has Commendable Breadth of understanding of hindu scriptures of wisdom. High level of scholarly teachings are simplified and explained. Thanks to Pratosh. He has explained "Purushartha" so beautifully for every soul on this earth can start to walk on. Not to go in to ultimately proving anything like Dwaita, Adwaita etc which probably each jeeva's experience to find its way to ultimate. He has put foundation stone to the young generation and all others to "recognise the divine playing in all matters/activities of life" so that we walk in the path of "Samskarana" (refinement) process to "getting Rid off that which is not our Swabhaava (each of our innate nature). I guess this will apply to every human being whether one belong to any school of Vedanta, philosophy or religion in the realm of Spirituality. I encourage this channel to do more of these and maintain a archive for new joiners to start from day one till some more complex questions are answered as it get progressed. Very nicely ordered the questions and asked. Again Thanks Pratosh at IIT for start sharing life technology for better life.. Transform these teachings in to a books of conversation that can be prescribed in the school.
Absolutely brilliant. Salute this effort. This is a goldmine for serious seekers of Dvaita Vedanta. Namaste!
Please make more of such videos available to people. Excellent conversation about veda. Need more of these type of conversations by learned men...
Insightful conversation, kudos to the interviewer too, he asked good questions.
Feast for my whole being. Thank you to Dr. Prathosh ji and the host. My sincere request to this channel is to please conduct such thought-provoking sessions. Great video.....lot of my questions were answered. Thank you very much. God bless you 🙏.
A wonderful and enlightening discussion in a masterly way.A real truth seeker and a siddha to a considerable extent.Harekrishna 🙏😇🕉
Thank you sharing these complex concepts in a simple and logical method. Please make a sequel to this! All of India's youth (especially the engineering and science universities) must watch this for how well it connects science, engineering and philosophy in simple English.
Great salute to the people who bought Dr pratosh to explain the whole concept of jeeva and moksha ...this video deserves a lifelong gratitude..
Beautiful session.. This is the absolute essesnce of Bharatiya Tatvavaada aka Madhvashaastra... The concepts which make one being all inclusive.. This is why Bhaarata has always been famous for... The knowledge... Please conduct more and more discourses like this..
This is an extremely high quality video. Excellent stuff. Really appreciate the audio and video quality, visual effects, editing...
Why you like Dvaita of Madhvacharya?
I was very much impressed the way you have explained the whole concept in very simple language. We appreciate your efforts and request you to create more such videos for people like us.
I had shared the video link with my Son, he was very much impressed, and he was requesting for more such videos.
May God bless you all with good health, Wealth, Prosperity, Happiness & Success.
Thank you very much, Sir. It's feedback like this that encourage us to put in the effort. It's always nice to see our efforts fructify. Thank you & your son for the blessings & appreciation.
Brilliant effort. The subject by itself is very complex, even this long session hardly satisfies, as so many questions prop up. Still many concepts are dealt with. Felt only the human life(jiva) is dealt with,other jivas and their bandhana etc should also be dealt with to make the understanding of bandhana and moksha clear. One more doubt remains, that is why in first place a jiva manifests to get into karmic cycle and then try to get out of it. Looking forward to more such efforts. Pranams to Dr. Pratosh and the anchor.
You are right. The subject is huge and so many concepts are interconnected that it's very hard to choose what to include & exclude. Yes.. could have added the question of why the jeevas are put here in the first place. Will see if we can take it up in another session. In the meanwhile, if you can understand kannada, there's a video by Dr. Prabhanjanachar that exclusively deals with jeeva titled "Understanding Jeeva Svarupa". Thank you. I'll convey your words of appreciation to Dr. Prathosh.
A gem of a video. Thank you for doing this Dr. Prathosh and Mr. Srikant. Your efforts along with Dr. Vyasankere Prabhanjanacharya and Jnanagamya Prasarana Channel can start a huge spiritual revolution in this world. Hope this reaches many more.
Need more discourses in English/Sanskrit
@@wizardofrosss True
very inspirational and its clearly explained how day to day life is inherently build upon vedas ..
This session was so revealing! The questioner is not an ordinary individual himself, the level of questions asked at opportune times show the depth as well as the basics. The answers were super!
Wonderful ! So much contentful and I am sure this helps for people who understand English words better than local languages. I am thankful to the Vedic Discourses group for coming up with such videos.
A beautiful way of explaining the madhwa philosophy (" reality") in a simple and understandable way for this generation by using the live examples. Great work done by all the people associated with this video and a whole hearted thanks to all of them. I am expecting more videos like this in detail for the betterment.
Great format, good editing, excellent guest. Appreciable if extended as a regular series.
This video is absolute gold. Thanks to Dr. Prathosh 🙏
Absolutely clear and complete clarity and very comprehensive and beautiful selection of questions which gas made the subject simple to understand. 👏
My previous good karma landed me on this video. Great work....🙏🙏🙏.
Blessed to watch this wonderful video. Got to get this video link and this is purely by the grace of god, and guru and thanks a ton to Dr Prathosh for his brilliant insights. Great questions by the interviewer too !
One of the best discourse
Good job Srikanth, very insightful video.
Brilliant. Thank you both of you.
Really excellent !!!Looking forward to see more such videos, which tend to bring out Acharya Madwa's teachings to mass english speaking audiences.
The end of the conversation is the most important for every one of us - to be associated with the Supreme. Once this is done, all other aspects fall in line automatically. Let's try to keep friendship with Sri Krsna. Then everything will become perfect. Great educative and enlightening video! Please keep up the spirit of Krsna.
My pranams to Dr. Pratosh!
Kindly make more videos on further topics of Tatvavada.
🕉️🌻🙏
ಭೌತಿಕ ಹಾಗೂ ಲೌಕಿಕದಲ್ಲೇ ಮುಳುಗಿರುವ ಇಂದಿನ ಯುವ ಪೀಳಿಗೆಗೆ ನೀವು ಒಂದು ಅದ್ಭುತ ಉದಾಹರಣೆಯಾಗಿರುವಿರಿ. ಅಭಿನಂದನೆಗಳು. ಈ ಕಾರ್ಯಕ್ರಮವನ್ನು ಸಾಧ್ಯವಾಗಿಸಿದ (ನನಗೆ ಇದರ ಕೊಂಡಿಯನ್ನು ಕಳುಹಿಸಿದವರೂ ಸೇರಿ)ಎಲ್ಲರಿಗೂ ನನ್ನ ಆದರ ಪೂರ್ವಕ ಧನ್ಯವಾದಗಳು👏👏👏
🕉️🌻भौतिक और लौकिकी प्रपंच मे ही डूबे आज के युवाओं के लिए आप एक अद्भुत उदाहरण है..... अभिनंदन। इस कार्यक्रम को जिन्होंने साध्य किया, जो इस के लिंक मुझे उपलब्ध कराया उनके समेत, उन सभी लोगों को मेरा सादर धन्यवाद।🌻💐🙏
👏👏👏
ಬಹಳ ಸಂತೋಷ. ನಿಮ್ಮ ಪ್ರೋತ್ಸಾಹ ನಮಗೆ ಸ್ಪೂರ್ತಿ. ಧನ್ಯವಾದಗಳು.
Brilliant video, the right questions were asked and answered. Hope to see more videos like this....😄
Accurately asked beautiful answered thank you for uploading🙏
Loved the conversation ...thank you and please continue to make such Knowledge full session ....
Nice discussion, informative with clarity. Looking forward to similar videos / material.🙏🙏
Thank you for such a clear and precise Q n A 🙏
Good job.. Thank you so much 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏👏👏👏👏👏
The best enlightening subject great work , Applaud to the whole team and my pranam to Dr.Parthosh. My suggestion to watch question no 34 it's great reply
This is so good. Understood so many concepts. Wish that you make more such videos to inspire my generation. You have used appropriate analogies and language to make us understand.
Please continue making more such videos. Humble request. Thanks.
Firstly, namaste to both of you. I was extremely happy to watch the video and understand the concepts explained. It's a great source of learning for youngsters like us. I have a question : It was told that if your free will (ichcha) is strong then the resultant will tend towards that. My question is should I have an ichcha according to what I perceive or should I surrender thinking may the best thing happen. Why I am asking this is, sometimes what we think was right earlier and failed to materialize has later felt it didn't materialize for a good reason. So how exactly does this work. Thank you.
Krishna answers this in Geetha - TAsmaat Shastram PramaNam te karyaakarya vyavasthitau. This means, one should align his/her ichha in accordance to the Shastras (considered to be Sri Hari's commandments). In summary, one SHOULD have icchas that is in alignment to Shastras, as much as possible.
@@prathoshap5226 Namaste, thank you for the answer. I have a query. The Shastras are not uniform in telling us what is right. For example, desiring a good house is consistent with pursuing Artha and Kama purushartha as a householder, but this pursuit also takes us away from the company of bhaktas and thoughts of God into the race of the materials and Artha. How do we frame our ichhas in these situations?
Good insightful Q&A srikanth...nice answers with clarity too..
Exceptionally brilliant
Nice video Srikanth. Great work.
Q37 @1:16:53 - Dr Prathosh says Jeeva and Ishwara are innately happy. However @1:17:47 he says it is not necessary that jeeva is innately happy. It is not clear, please clarify
Yes, while comparing the best of the jeevas with the supreme, the Jeeva with the highest of happiness - the highest of sattvik nature - pales in comparison with that of the Supreme's happiness which is never limited unlike ours. Later, when the topic of bad nature or svabhava comes up, it's clarified that it indeed exists and such jeevas' moksha would be radically different and it won't be that of happiness (although their prayatna or effort was to attain happiness). A simple example to understand it can be students attempting an examination. Although all students are after the same goal, the results (moksha) will reveal the failed students and the passed ones.
When is next conversation with Dr. Pratosh ? We can have sessions
1. How to start vedantic studies for different age people
2. General topics like how Hinduism will survive with constant attack from other religions
3. Role of Sanskrit
Will have to see when Dr. Prathosh will be available. I'll present these topic suggestions and see how it goes. Meanwhile, Shri Krishnarajacharya Kuthpadi is striving in the same direction. You can check out his work on youtube in JnanaGamya Prasarana Channel (Kannada only)
Sir I have a question on 'Self'. Does the jeeva enter in to another body as soon as it is released from the present one, or takes some time to do it. If so, what does it do in the intermittant period.
Shreeraagam The Garuda Purana goes into detail about the types of intermittent bodies the Jeeva takes before the next sthoola deha is taken and the process is dependent on the jeevas karmas too. This is a huge topic in itself and I would recommend going through Vid. Pushkarachar's lectures on Garuda Puarana.
@@VedicDiscourses Sure .. Thank you so much for the quick reply.. I have a lot of other doubts.. Will ask one by one.. This is a big platform for learning.. Excellent job .. Thanks a lot to you people..
First of all thank you very much for all the effort you have put here trying to answer very fundamental questions.. Beautiful and meaningful conversation with lot of practicality, need bit more of explanation on prayers, rituals and customs, what effects it has on our day to day life
Thank you. Regarding rituals, there's an excellent talk by Dr. Sunder Madakshira. Here's a link to it - ua-cam.com/video/PnwpJb84hx8/v-deo.html
@@VedicDiscourses Dr Prathosh, Namaskara. I have some questions to ask of you via personal communication. How may I write to you? Thank you.
@@krishnabhaktisangha You can contact Dr. Prathosh at prathoshap@gmail.com
Nice discussion
Very nice explanation.. Thanks a lot..
I have some questions.. Only madhwa shashtra explains all the tricky questions, no doubt in that... But if think the other way, it's built on some pre-defined assumptions like 1) jeevatma is eternally associated with swabhava.. 2) only 1 paramaatma and infinite jeevatma...
Isn't it like reverse engineered and fixed on some unquestionable assumptions as things getting more trickier?
I believe "Harisarvottamatva" and seeking answers to my doubts.. 🙏
The shastras do not label any concept unquestionable. They encourage debate as a matter of fact - tad viddhi pranipatena pariprashnena sevaya Gita - 4.34. And, do not speak of anything that cannot be realized / verified. Just that some would need a little more tapas or discipline than others. Madhva shastra came at a point when there were atleast 21 prominent philosophies in practice and the bhashya presented by Sri Madhvacharya had to be proved against each of them. So, the concepts presented are extremely & thoroughly dissected & argued with practically zero assumptions made. It appears to have been reverse engineered :) because it beautifully answers the apparent contradictions in the shastras. In fact, that's actually how a bhashya is verified. It should not contradict the statements of the shastras. For the specific texts on why Paramatma is that one supreme and jeevas are that infinite infinitesimals and other derivations, Sri Jayatheertha's Nyaya Sudha, Sri Vadiraja's Yukti Mallika, Sri Vyasaraja's Chandrika, Sri Raghavendra Swami's Parimala & others are where the concepts are thoroughly dealt with, against contradicting arguments.
Its really good prathosh
Really awesome the way video was presented with explanation.. I watched it initially when it got uploaded but looks like heavy modifications were done to improve one's understanding
It’s the same as was uploaded initially. I added timestamps for easy navigation.
I have few questions
1.Regarding the description of earth and brahmana in shastra do not match the present description of earth and universe how do we reconcile it
2. The concept of humans millions of years ago being civilised is contrary to the theory of evolution and archeological facts found how do we reconcile it
Regarding the first point, description of Earth and shastras - it does match with the current findings and you can find info on the net that goes into much details. The confusion lies in interpretations I believe. It's perhaps beyond the scope of this discussion. For more info, I would suggest going through content on other channels which delve deeper on the subject matter.
Regarding the second point, concept of humans existence millions of years ago and the theory of evolution. Let me talk about the theory of evolution since I recently had looked into it. The shastras accept evolution but not in the sense of nature being independently intelligent to evolve - but rather in the sense of intelligence (belonging to life) being applied to evolve. For example, we perhaps can have seedless dates or apples or mangoes, when we systemically engineer & grow them so - which otherwise wouldn't happen naturally given millions of years. But what about the occasions where they do happen naturally, perhaps a mango with two seeds or a two headed snake or a calf? This too is accepted as not occurring naturally, but rather by intelligence (belonging to life) that's beyond our capacity to understand, owing to our limited sense perception.
Regarding the concept of intelligent life that's a million years old. There are a lot of theories for & against it, that's been dealt with thoroughly on the net. I guess we can go through and decide for ourselves. It perhaps requires a video of its own to do justice.
Thanks for responding
Very enlightening. Given to understand that existence of Jeeva is characterised by Gnana, Iccha and Prayatna, how to ascertain that a person in 'Coma' has these three gunas? My profound regards to Dr. Pratosh and Dr. Shrikant.
Thank you for your kind words of appreciation. Regarding a person being in Coma, the Vedas speak of physical bodies that are subtler than the ones we see. Out of them, 3 are primary called the "linga", "anirudda" & "sthoola" (sthoola is the one we see). And these bodies do have the capacity to retain knowledge, capacity to act & desire. This is a very complex subject matter and I know that the answer doesn't even come close to explaining the how & the what. If you can understand Kannada, there's an excellent video by Dr. Prabhanjanacharya explaining this concept titled "Understanding Jeeva Svaroopa". On a side note, it's only Dr. Prathosh who has a PhD :)
How can I buy mudra mound and sussumna or Scorpion roopa of Vishnu idlos
Where do you stay? If in Bangalore, I can suggest places & shops.
Sir, It is not a naaptol video 😂😂
Thank you for a fantastic discourse. I just have a question.....once jeeva attains Mokasha it will not come back...then, great saints such as Sri Raghavendra swamy, Sri Shridi Sai Baba, Sri Madvacharyaru the likes come back to earth even after Moksha in different forms in different era. Do they choose to come back or are they sent back to guide us. Thank you once again. 🙏💐🙏
Once a jeeva attains moksha, the jeeva doesn't take birth again, it is said. Then, what are the greats like Sri Rayaru doing here. Dr. Prabhanjanacharya explained this very well with an example. Imagine the ones who have attained moksha as people standing at the railway station with a reserved ticket in their hands. Rayaru and such 'aparoksha gnanis' fall under this category. They are here finishing up their 'prarabdha karma' with moksha ticket in their hands. The system is made so; otherwise common folk like us won't have anyone to guide us to moksha.
42:15 Isn't the innate nature a force by itself that acts on him? Isn't it the reason he steals?
Also, if it is the innate nature that is a fixed attribute of the jeeva that makes people, by and large, do the things they do, why are criminals punished and high achieving humans celebrated? It's not in the human's (physical form) capability to completely reverse the effect of the innate nature right? So since the human follows the nature of the jeeva, can it be considered his free will's fault in doing so, and punishing him based on the rulebook the other jeevas made?
Very deeply worded. Taking the first point "Isn't the innate nature a force by itself that acts on him? Isn't it the reason he steals?" - Rather than seeing it as a force that acts upon the jeeva... it's something that's the jeeva himself. It's like a person committing a good or bad deed with absolutely no force upon him, out of his own free will, to which he gets rewarded or punished. No one is forcing the jeeva to have a nature that's against him (separating a jeeva's nature from the jeeva is as good as killing it, which no jeeva aspires for, when uninfluenced & unimpeded by other factors). If he is stealing out of pure nature (with other influences negated), it's purely out of his own desire, which he chose himself (the desire / choice is the nature... he is not bound by it, rather it is himself... it's not external to him). Getting to the second point, "if it's the innate nature that makes the jeeva do bad deeds, why punish him... it's not his fault". If done under the influence of other jeevas, or circumstances, yes, it won't fully be his fault. But, if the jeeva commits a crime out of his own free will, uninfluenced, & since the free will or innate nature or svabhava is him, he becomes responsible. Svabhava is something that cannot be separated from the jeeva. The jeeva ceases to be if it's taken out. The primary difference between a living & non living entity is iccha or desire or will, on which the jeeva does have control over. So, he (of that svabhava or that-natured entity) becomes responsible for his actions.
@@VedicDiscourses It took me some time to absorb the concept clearly, but now I am clear about it. Thank you for this video, and your prompt reply. This really made me curious to learn more about the dhvaitha siddhantha.
A very nice presentation of basic concepts. Only one thing I disagree. It is really a complex topic, but the siddhAnta is very clear and specific on this. There is absolutely no freewill for any Jiva. That is logical too as otherwise it implies ignorance for Ishvara.
Namaste Tadipatri ji - this term of free-will is quite loosely defined and not well-understood. Since you have been a great exponent of Shastras, I would want to elaborate my stand - Jeeva has Kartrutva but absolutely no Swantantrya. I'm sure you'll agree with this (please refer to Kartrutvadhikarana in Tatparya Chandrika for details).
It is only that Jeeva has Natural Ichha which I called free-will (to distinguish between a jaDa puppet and Chetana Jeeva). There's absolutely no Swantantrya in whatever sense. In that sense, one may say Jeeva has will which isn't free (dependence on his own karma, swabhava and Ishwara).
Hope this clarifies. Happy to discuss further.
Humbly yours,
Prathosha.
On Question 34, instead of why God needs our prayers it would be have been nice if the question said "If nobody can change the innate nature of the jeeva what is the purpose of prayers or offerings to gods. We have seen or heard situations change by offering services to god or by performing certain rituals. So what exactly are we praying for? ". I think Chapter 6 can make a whole episode on its own. But great episode overall, thank you.
Prayers are usually done to alter our karma. The question could be why would / should God alter a jeeva's karma on the basis of prayers. You are right. Chapter 6 can be elaborated into an episode of its own.
Thanks for asking the question, same thoughts sprang when I was watching too
I don't get chance to learn and to give time to know our dharmic pustak...Many adharmic abrahmic inhumans try to demean our Ishwar and in this video neutrality and unbiased nature of Ishwar explain well..Thank you for this whole enlightening series keep exploring and awakening us by such simple way which is powerful and easily understood...
When is his next video coming??
If everything works out as planned, we will be uploading in a few months.
@@VedicDiscourses Thanks for the prompt reply, eagerly waiting!
Sir, What is the definition of "coma state in icu"?
where one cannot "know", "desire" or "act"? Is he dead or alive? does jeeva reside in a person who is in coma?
A comatose person is technically alive. And with life, there's always the acts of knowing & desiring even if it's not visible externally just like how a dreaming person would look inactive to an outsider.
Thanks for this wonderful session. It clarified a lot of questions I had.
At 29:57, Dr. Pratosh says jeeva is not puppet. Then in that context what exactly is the meaning of the phrase "naham kartha hari kartha"? Please clarify.
Jeeva is not a puppet in the sense that jeeva has his free will, however minuscule & limited it may be. Jeeva by definition has kartrutva, the ability to do (along with gnana & iccha). But absolutely no svatantra - the ability to initiate anything outside of the choices made available to him. Often times, mixing up the terms kartrutva and svatantra is the cause of our contradictory interpretations. The Brahma Sutra verse 'karta shastrarthavathvaat om' states that jeeva is a karta, just that he is not the svatantra karta but rather an asvatantra karta. This is the meaning of the phrase 'Naham kartha hari kartha' - SriHari is that one independent kartha, not me.
@@VedicDiscourses thanks for the clarification.
If innate nature of a jeeva doesn't change, how does a jeeva with "taamasa nature" gets moksha? Or it doesn't ever?
@@csmcsmyt the term moksha refers to - getting rid of everything that isn't the true nature. So in that sense, Tamasa jeevas do get "moksha" albeit not a blissful one. By definition, they'll be themselves (not a pleasurable self though)
@@VedicDiscourses one more clarification - the term "Free will" doesn't have a correct English translation. The summary of Shastric points on this topic is as follows - Jeeva definitely has Kartrutva (Gnyaana, ichha and kruti) and doesn't have Swantantrya (Anadhinatva). Hope it helps
@@prathoshap5226 What i have heard is that, the jeeva is made up of 3 things Sat-Chit-Ananda and so is Parmatma, & if jeeva is the pratibimba of Parmatma then even the Tamsic Jeevas too have the pratibimba of Parmatma in them, so my question is in case of Tamsic Jeevas what happens to the "Ananda" part when they attain liberation? Isn't Ananda ecstasy? Why is that the Tamsic Jeevas experience Dukha when they attain liberation?
Excellent explaination of madhwa tatwa pl keep some more episodes of such very interesting topics in madhwa philisophy . Can we relate this philosophy to writings of author Paul brunton Swamy Prabhupada etc pl some more programmes by dr pratosh dr Shanta desai
Thank you for your kind words. We did have a series planned on understanding the Bhagavad Geeta deeply. But it's getting postponed since a year on account of the pandemic.
@@VedicDiscourses please start bhagavad series asap 🙏
It wud be extremely helpful for us
Jeeva's innate characteristic is called Svabhava. Is Guna & Svabhava the same ? If that is the case then Guna's (Satva, Rajas, Tamas) can be changed, thus Svabhava can be changed over various life cycles.
Gunas can come and go but not svabhava. Gunas can cover a person’s svabhava. Gunas do change but not a jeeva’s identity. Jeeva is distinguished by his svabhava, which can never change although covered by gunas. This is an excellent topic to take up in an upcoming video. I’ll see if that’s possible.
I have some doubts and I appreciate if answered 1. How does the kundalini energy mentioned in lalita sahasranama fit here? A lot of texts like Tirumanthiram, Hatha Yoga Pradipika, Shiva Samhita, Gheranda Samhita etc talk about this powerful energy. Some modern rishis like Vivekananda go to the extend of saying the whole reason one has certain high experiances is because of this energy called Kundalini. 2. Dwaita though doesn’t talk about Kundalini talks about Vishnu Sarvotamatatva and the complete devotion to God Vishnu who is the All Pervader. Also Shri Madhwacharya puts the Brahmanda Purana(Lalita Sahasranama falls here) into Rajasic Puranas. Does it imply that Kundalini energy or whatever techniques that deal with raising this energy is acknowledged by Dwaita system to be Rajasic and are hence created for the purpose of confusion implying that these doesn’t exist? Also meaning that whoever reached that state where Sahasrara is told to be awakened is in a delusional state? Also in all the yogic cases, pranayama is given a very high priority. And the same pranayama exists in Sandhya Vandhana. So why is there a similarity in the exercise when the only purana that deals with Kundalini is meant to be delusional or Rajasic. 3. Even though specific prayers in temples mentioned in the video though can be refuted by the statement in Bhagavatam by Prahlada as in the video, I see some temples in Kerala meant for specific actions like VishnuMaya Chathan temple(en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avanangattilkalari_Vishnumaya_Temple) which deals with praying to a deity who upon satisfied will grant as per the prayer even if it means endangering the life of an another person. In that case, what is that deity? Is it a Jeeva or is it another form of Supreme Vishnu as per dwaita or do we have devils in our system? My previous colleague(I trust him to be honest and so take his experiences seriously) was from the temple family and his view on his experience was that God in Temple exists to answer the specific prayers for the temple. I don't want to challenge that deity to know if it exists as I'm told for certainty that it can be challenged and the bad results can be known quick :) 4. Of people who are mentally challenged, how will they attain moksha without a godly intervention as most of them from my direct experience do not know what they're doing. Or is it that they're deemed to be Tamasic souls as per dwaita and cannot be brought back? Because they cannot be forced to pray god for help due to their mental limitations on being sincere to devotion. As an explorer, I'd like to see if all these dots can be connected to a satisfactory level. Please correct if I got anything factually wrong. Thanks
I have not done my research on kundalini / Vivekananda's thoughts on it or its reference in Lalita Sahasranama. You have made many specific references which I am not aware of. I'll talk about it with a few people and see if someone well qualified can answer these queries. That part seems a little scary - the temple in Kerala that you are mentioning. And interesting; I wasn't aware of that. Yes, I am with you in standing clear of challenging any deities :) Let me try to answer the 4th point - how do mentally challenged people do their sadhane as they don't even have the tools to do so. They most probably won't. Not in this birth atleast. The karma that we undergo is a result of our previous actions and they will last as long as they need to, until the last experience of the result is had. Once it's done, the jeeva will certainly be able to resume his sadhana or jignasa. The challenged jeeva might not necessarily be of a tamasic nature. Satvic jeevas can undergo bad reactions too as a result of misled deeds of the past done under the influence of karma and prakruti, and a bit of their will. Let me ask around regarding the other interesting points raised.
Is Vedic thought is praise then prayer
I didn't understand the question / comment.
Excellent...answers to q.no 34 to 38 can be more elaborate for our understanding....Can you please do it.
balajiachar tamraparni True. The last chapter deserves a video of its own to fully understand the subject matter. I will discuss with Dr. Prathosh & see if we can take it up.
excellent discourse by Dr. Are there any lectures on Jeeva Kartrutva by Dr Pratosh? Danyavad
I am not aware of any lectures on that particular topic.
Jeeva can be compared to Energy.. jeeva is one kind of energy..it's neither created nor destroyed
Sirs, Namaste ! Indeed great session and an eye opener episode. I am a tiny "jeeva" who has a lot of questions in mind but not knowing where to start.
As I have to, so that I shall get some light, wanted to know if the innate nature of a jeeva is " being confused" how can that jeeva come out of this ? This jeeva knows that he has to come out of this confusion and trying hard as well .Now u mention tat even Paramatma will not touch upon the innate nature of a jeeva, how this jeeva could help himself? Or who shall help him? Is there a way?
I am greatly confused. Pls help to clarify.
An excellent thought provoking instance - what if the innate nature of the jeeva is to be eternally confused. So, by definition, that jeeva is always confused. The jeeva gets every opportunity to get out of it, but at every opportunity, that jeeva chooses (this word is significant) to stay confused. Out of its own free will, the jeeva keeps choosing to stay in confusion. That innate nature isn't a boon or a curse to the jeeva, but rather it is the jeeva itself. The jeeva isn't shackled by its innate nature, but rather those "shackles" define the jeeva such that removing the shackles is equivalent to destroying that very jeeva - which Paramatma never does. This question, as to how such a jeeva can get out of such a condition, is something that a person outside of such confusion can conclusively ask. The jeeva who is eternally confused will be in confusion about even knowing if he's confused and would therefore never conclusively ask anyone to get him out of confusion. I have answered to the best of my knowledge.
@@VedicDiscourses .. Sir, Thanks for your response. I think I should equip myself more to a state where in I can clearly be able to understand this confusion. In fact, I am in the process of it. I shall seeking your advises in future as well. Thanks for your time and for your amazing efforts towards this service.
For this question sri bannanje govindacharyara has given answers. Pls watch swabhava prabhava by bannanje govindachary. It is about genetic force and environmental force .
Wow!
Wow, very good presentation. Do you have a group where you hold regular discussions or seminars? Be it online or so.
Manoj Kumar we don't have any groups as such. We ll update you if we make one.
Yes Manoj. Pl join the Madhvacharya for the Youth workshop channel.
Can we contact Dr. Prathosh ?
@@VedicDiscourses thank you so much
Thank you for the video. I can’t understand how the innate nature of the jiva can be “miserable”. If the jiva a minuscule part of Isvara and therefore has His qualities in minuscule quantities? Can a svabhava really be miserable? Please comment :-)
Let's go through the first point as to how a jeeva's nature could be that of misery. We all know that every jeeva wants happiness. Even a tiny ant walks towards sugar and walks away from fire. Happiness is what every jeeva seeks. However, the means to happiness vary according to the individual traits of the jeeva. Combine that with free will and the jeeva can choose certain actions over others. It's these choices that determine the path to happiness that the jeeva takes. Certain actions of the jeeva, even though done for his happiness, lead to misery. Given a choice, certain jeevas always choose questionable means to their happiness which makes them perpetually miserable, out of their own free will (keeping the circumstantial influences aside for now). Such jeevas are what we refer to as having a miserable nature. Note that such jeevas don't even aspire to change. It's the most natural of states for them to be in and they do not see any fault in that, even though it's leading to misery. It's only the good natured jeevas that want to "save" them.
Coming to the second point that the jeeva is a part of Isvara - this is true in the sense that there's absolute dependency on Isvara; the jeeva is absolutely dependent on Isvara for everything, including his own immortality. And there's similarities in the sense that Isvara is a living entity, and so is the jeeva. But the similarities end there. That Absolute is a different species altogether, unlike anything we have ever seen or experienced. The jeeva is not a part of Isvara as in hands are parts of our body; but rather, the jeeva is a part of Isvara as in a pet is part of a family, for example.
Vedic Discourses thank you I will take some time to study your kind response
The Shruti Statement also says,
Ayam Atma Brahma !!
" Verily, this Atman is Brahman."
So, I want to know the interpretation from Tattva-vada's point of view.Plz
Hari Hari
The statement अयम् आत्मा ब्रह्म from माण्डूक्य is referring to the Brahman himself. To give a simple example, the phrase 'ayam purushah Srikanthaha' would mean 'This person is Srikanth' while pointing to that person. Likewise, this atman is brahman (pointing to the Supreme and not the jeeva). For a detailed and thorough proof of such statements from the Tattva vada point of view, Shri Sathyadhyana Theertha's works (in Sanskrit & Kannada) serve as excellent resources.
@@VedicDiscourses Prabhu, One more doubt: Sriman Madhvacarya says that the Jivas are different from Ishvara from all respects.But in Bhagavad Gita 15.15 we find Lord Sri Krishna saying: Mamaivamsho jeevo loke jiva bhute sanatanah i.e. The Jivas are eternal parts of Him(Ishvara).Does Tattvavada also recognises that Atma is anu and Paramatma is Vibhu just like Ramanujacarya said??
Plz dispel my doubt🙏🏼🙏🏼
Also thanks for the above answer😊
@@soumyabratasahoo3649 Glad to discuss 🙏🏼 The statement ममैवांशो जीवलोके जीवभूत: सनातन: refers to the jeevas as part of Ishwara in the sense that the very existence of the jeevas is because of that Ishwara without whom the jeevas wouldn't be eternal - Bhagavata 2.10.12 - द्रव्यं कर्म च कालश्च स्वभावो जीव एव च यदनुग्रहतः सन्ति न सन्ति यदुपेक्षया . The jeevas are a part of the Lord in the sense that a pet is a part of a family and not as in a hand is part of the body. The jeevas are very much minuscule compared to the immeasurable ocean that is the Paramatma who takes the anu/vibhu forms as He desires fit.
@@VedicDiscourses Thanks Thanks Prabhu for clearing my doubts.It's my humble request if it's poasible to make euch congenial videos on Bhagavad Gita sessions.😊😄🙏🏼🙏🏼
@@soumyabratasahoo3649 🙏🏼 We are in the process of bringing out more videos.
Watching my prof in IISc who teaches Machine Learning talking about Vedas...OMG!!
Sir thanks for this wonderful session.can you make a video about madwacharya bhashya on bhagwad geeta
This is an excellent topic. Let me take this to Dr Prathosh. If you have specific questions or topics on the Bhashya, do mail them to me at vedic.discourses@gmail.com . We are currently listing out the topics to be covered and a session on the Bhashya would be appropriate. Thanks.
Thank you sir,it would be a great benefit
Pranams to the Gnavruddha jeeva
Its very great session.. Can you please also do this session in kannada ?
There are already a great many lectures about jeeva svaroopa, svabhava, karma and moksha in Kannada. You can look up Sri Prabhanjanacharyaru's lectures. We chose English so that the knowledge is accessible even by people who speak Tamil, Telugu, Marati, Hindi etc.
🕉️ @12:54...ತಿಳಿಯುವ-ಇಚ್ಛಿಸುವ ಮತ್ತು ಪ್ರಯತ್ನಿಸುವ ಲಕ್ಷವುಳ್ಳವು ಜೀವಗಳು ಎನ್ನುವುದಾದರೆ.... ಸಸ್ಯಗಳು ಏನು.... ಅವು ಬೆಳೆಯುವುವು, ಉತ್ಪತ್ತಿ ಮಾಡುವುವು ಮತ್ತು ಪ್ರಯತ್ನ (ಕೆಲವು ಕತ್ತರಿಸಿದ ಮೇಲೂ ಚಿಗುರುವ) ಪ್ರಯತ್ನ ಮಾಡುವುವು.... ಅವು ತಿಳಿಲಾರವು ಎಂದುಕೊಂಡಿರುವೆ...... ತಿಳಿಯಬಲ್ಲವೇ!?
ಸರಿಯಾಗಿ ಹೇಳಿದ್ದೀರಿ. ವಿಜ್ಞಾನ ಇದನ್ನು ಒಪ್ಪಿದೆ. www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2016/02/160221-plant-science-botany-evolution-mabey-ngbooktalk/
Very nice explanation of Dwaita philosophy. Nicely produced.
Traditionally we have three major explanations for this creation -- Adwaita, Vishishtadwaita, and Dwaita. But we should remember that finally what you experience is the ultimate test of truth. Explanation of truth is impossible. Therefore in all schools of thought there will always be a question about this creation which cannot be answered by applying logic. One may choose one of the schools of thought mentioned above that satisfies him/her.
@@rsamurti ನಿಮ್ಮ ಕಳಕಳಿಯ ಉತ್ತರಕ್ಕೆ ಧನ್ಯವಾದಗಳು....ನನ್ನ ಅಧ್ಯಯನಕ್ಕೆ ಪ್ರೇರಣೆಯಾಗಿದೆ..... ಮುಂದುವರಿಸುವೆ.🌻🙏👏👏👏
Wish such people get popular, instead of people so called "sadhguru"
@@pavankumarkundagolSadhguru is a Buddhist in the garb of Saffron and Vedas.
@@binitasahoo3872Sadhguru is a mleccha, there is no "sat" in him
Please explain the meaning sir - न तस्य प्रतिमा अस्ति यस्य नाम महाद्यशः |
हिरण्यगर्भऽ इत्येष मा मा हिंन्सिदितेषा यस्मान्न जातऽ इत्येषः-yajurveda 32.3
I have forwarded your question to Dr. Prathosh.
@@VedicDiscourses sir replay to this question.other religion fool hindu people by saying there is no image of god(na tasya pratima asti)
Prathosh sir, you said there's nothing like Universally good or bad, but does hatred towards God is also subjective ?
Kindly help me here...
Yes, hatred towards God is very much subjective. Kindly elaborate on your question to discuss further.
I'm tired of performing kaamya karma. I'm not getting even a peace of mind. If I perform nishkaama karma will god take responsibility of my material life??
The whole idea of nishkama karma is to just perform duties and ignore the outcomes. God is not duty bound to "take care" of our material comforts. He just protects our karmic accounts.
🙏🏻🌹🙏🏻
Humble pranams to both of you. I have few questions.
1.Why do we ask, dhiyo yonaha prachodayat? Here we are asking for sat buddhi. Even chamakam of, tatriyopanishat we ask for for vrihiyashcha me, mashaashchame, tilaaschame. So isn't it praying god?
2.Why must we surrender to god? 3.Also Pls enlighten further on Prayatna. Thanks and namskaras again. Excellent interview.
Namaskaragalu. Taking the first question, that is, the gayatri mantra "Dhiyo yona: prachodayat" falls under the type of prayer made to get out of the karmic cycle towards moksha and are most welcome. Prayers by themselves are not good or bad but when prayers are taken with their intentions, they make up good or bad prayers. So, the Gayatri mantra is most welcome and in fact one of our prescribed duties. The second question perhaps needs a discussion on its own. Prayatna too is a fairly complex subject matter. We'll see if we can take it up. Thank you.
Our prayer is only to realise our potential and God according to our potential. When we say dhiyo yo Naha prachodayat, we are not asking God, we are remembering god's power to open up our potential that's all
Surrendering means realizing the greatness of God and his kindness towards us and due to that developing love towards god.
Namaskar... Would like to know about the hidden meaning of those prayers which read "aputro labhate putran, nitdhano dhanavan bhavet... etc.. "
But how can someone be said to be inately evil when even the worst kind of people have kindness and goodness inside them?
Can it not be possible by the association of the jeeva with prakriti he develops the kind of chitta that might cause him to steal or harm?
Isn't it possible that the nature is never set in stone but can be changed as seen in many people before?
The first point is answered in Q20. To elaborate on that, this classification of them being innately evil or good is very subjective. One nation's terrorist is another nation's patriot. So, assuming that we are talking about good & bad nature in accordance with the Vedas, it is true that a person who is mostly classified as evil can have good qualities - just that his bad qualities overshadow the good ones. At the same time, there can be people with the worst of qualities with absolutely no good qualifications - jeevas are infinite - so, such jeevas are in existence too, even if we haven't come across them - just as we might not have come across absolutely good jeevas.
To the second point. Absolutely possible. In fact, our scriptures emphasize that the innate nature of a jeeva can never be factually determined, because of karma & prakruthi. Only liberated jeevas are not under the influence of prakruti. It's very much possible that good natured jeevas commit heinous questionable acts because of the influence of prakruti & karma. There are a good many examples in Mahabharata & Ramayana.
About the third point. Svabhava or innate nature defines the jeeva. The innate nature is the jeeva himself, which is inseparable from him. It's part of his identity or rather it is him. For example, if sugar isn't sweet or milk isn't white, it's most probably not sugar or milk. If the quality of sweetness or the color of milk is taken out of it, it is no longer sugar / milk. So, if nature is something that can be separated from the jeeva, it's not his nature, but rather something that was an influence (karma / prakruthi). Keeping this in mind, when we see bad deeds committed by a jeeva who is by and large, a good person, such acts are most probably done under the influence of past karma / prakruthi and most probably not something associated with innate nature. However, as stated before, we are in no position to determine the nature of a jeeva for a fact. We can only make a guess.
So if the ratio of jeeva to body is 1:1, and jeeva always existed, then where were these jeevas residing before they took the form of the bodies in an expanding population!
The jeevas are said to reside within one of the forms of the Lord. Imagine a bag of seeds held by a farmer, about to be sown. And the population need not be ever expanding. Non-human species of life should also be considered.
Please interview bannanje govindacharya.. his point of view of Svabhava is quite different.. it's not freewill.. & to say God is just an inspirer or preraka, doesn't have anything to do with actions is completely against the tenets of Tatva vada. God as sarvakarta is major portion of the philosophy
Namaskaragalu. I don't think Dr. Prathosh implies that God only stops at prerane. God is sarvakarta as you rightly said. At the same time, the jeeva isn't a puppet either. Jeevas have kartrutva in spite of God being sarvakarta. I don't think Dr. Prathosh's statements contradict Dr. Bannanje's in any way in terms of svabhava & free will. Let me know the exact statements of Bannanje / Dr. Prathosh that seem to be in contradiction and I'll be happy to take it up further.
Acharya bannanje govindacharya said swabhava prabhava that is genetic force and environmental force of the jeeva
Jaya Vishnu
Yo🙏🏼❤
🙏🙏🙏🙏
Firstly, thanks for such an enlightening post. I appreciate the questions and the answers from these Jeevas 😂.
I have a doubt,
In Q23 & 25 I have a doubt. In the answer to Q23 @ about the 50th min, he says there are jeevas whose innate nature is not happiness. In Q25 we are are getting rid of Karma and Prakriti's influence to attain moksha by using the innate nature. So there is a bit of contradiction that in Q23 it seems like some cannot attain moksha and in Q25 it seems like everyone can attain moksha? Pl explain.
True. There are jeevas who continue to always (out of their own free will, without external influences) make choices that result in misery. Moksha is nothing but removing the karmic & prakriti influences to enjoy pure nature - which happens to be that of misery for such jeevas. There was a nice example that was given in this regard. Moksha can be thought of as passing out of a university - as a graduate or as a failure is up to the student or jeeva. But every student eventually leaves (attains moksha) the university.
It is said Soul is changeless how can different souls have different svabhava..... I think svabhava is of the mind because soul is changeless acc to BG.
How can there be jivas who will eternally live in hell??
Namaste,
Soul is changeless - True, when talking of the pure soul devoid of any material afflictions.
If soul is changeless, how can different souls have different svabhava? - The two are not mutually exclusive... Different souls have different svabhavas, that do not change.
I think svabhava is of the mind - Different minds do have different properties or svabhavas - not talking about jeeva svabhava or the properties of the pure soul which is non-different from the soul; but talking about the svabhava or material properties of the mind that is ever changing according to the environment and circumstances it is in.
How can there be jeevas who will eternally live in hell? This is not too hard to understand. We see life-imprisonment & capital punishment awarded by the best of learned judges. There will always be jeevas who irrespective of favorable circumstances/inspiration, will always choose (out of their own free will, without force or obligations) to do what is deemed as bad or wrong. Such persons deserve different environment/rules away from the regular jeevas who are here for their sadhana. We see good souls begging life-imprisonment for serial offenders and judges do favor such petitions if the offenders repeatedly choose such a path. Its important to understand that such choices are not imposed upon the offenders but taken voluntarily out of their own will... that is, they are choosing to be what they are, in spite of every opportunity offered otherwise.
What is the scriptural evidence that one soul is different from another? And in general scriptural evidence for Panch Bheda
Different natures of living beings can be explained by mind also.
@@saurabhkamat1928 Namaste. You seem to be putting forth the monistic theory. For a fairly exhaustive debate on monistic vs dualistic points of view with scriptural references, you can refer to Surendranath Dasgupta's A History of Indian Philosophy and for a more accurate understanding of dualism with references & arguments, a recent publication of Sabha Sara Sangraha (kannada) by Sri Satyadhyana Theertha is helpful.
In that book of Indian philosophy there is not much mention of dvaita system.
Kannada in don't understand
I just want you to quote 2 or 3 verses from shastra/upanishads where it directly or indirectly says difference between 2 jivas (one bheda out of the panch bhedas)
@@saurabhkamat1928 Putting forth a few verses from the Gita (not exhaustive):-
BG 8.20 - परस्तस्मात्तु भावोऽन्योऽव्यक्तोऽव्यक्तात्सनातनः। यः स सर्वेषु भूतेषु नश्यत्सु न विनश्यति।।
There exists another eternal who is not destroyed when all beings are destroyed. Here, if the word avyakta is treated to be something material or impersonal or a property of the manifest jeeva, it's cleared up in the next verse.
BG 8.21 - अव्यक्तोऽक्षर इत्युक्तस्तमाहुः परमां गतिम्। यं प्राप्य न निवर्तन्ते तद्धाम परमं मम।।
That which is the imperishable, that which is the highest goal which on reaching, a jeeva would not come back into this manifest reality, that is my abode. Avyakta -> Akshara -> Parama gati -> My abode -> Krishna's abode
BG 15.16
द्वाविमौ पुरुषौ लोके क्षरश्चाक्षर एव च। क्षरः सर्वाणि भूतानि कूटस्थोऽक्षर उच्यते।।
In this world are two categories - the kshara (fallible) and akshara (infallible). Kshara are the sarvani bhutani - all beings with material bodies (subjected to birth & death), and the other who is above the cycle of birth and death. The divisions made are among chetanas or living entities and not between matter & chetana or between the purusha & his energy/maya (as theorized by some schools of thought). Another point to be noticed is the plural used for jeevas - bhootani, meaning jeevas are many, who are different from that uttama purusha (next verse).
BG 15.17
उत्तमः पुरुषस्त्वन्यः परमात्मेत्युदाहृतः। यो लोकत्रयमाविश्य बिभर्त्यव्यय ईश्वरः।।
That uttama purusha is different (anyaH)...
BG 2.12
न त्वेवाहं जातु नासं न त्वं नेमे जनाधिपाः। न चैव न भविष्यामः सर्वे वयमतः परम्।।
Never was a time when I, you or all the adhipas or kings, did not exist. And there will never be a time when we will stop existing. Here, one can argue that Krishna is referring to the distinct bodies of the same self. If so, the bodies surely didn't exist before, and neither will they exist after death - so, definitely not referring to the diversity of bodies. If referring to the same soul within bodies, it implies that the identity of you, me, them will always exist - liberation or not, implying the difference even after eikya (or monistic moksha), which doesn't seem to hold, if eikya moksha / avidya naasha is considered.
Furthermore, throughout the second chapter (2.13, 18, 17, 20, 21, 23, 24 etc), the jeeva's permanence is put forth. Which means, that the jeeva, that identity which makes him a jeeva, holds true eternally (avikara - unchanging svaroopa), which would not be the case if we consider eikya in moksha. One can argue that the avikara self is manifest in diverse vikaras (to us) due to maya or avidya. But, that theory doesn't seem to hold when it is examined against jeeva's svaroopa characteristics (which would directly contradict eikya moksha).
These are just a few pages (about 5-8) taken from Sabhasaara Sangraha of Sri Sathyadhyana Theertha. The book is 900 pages long, dealing with many more interesting points & contradictions among theories (not limited to monistic theories) as a series of questions and answers. It's unfortunate that it's only available in Kannada. I hope it gets an english translation.
That said, there is a lot more to discuss. There are many more interesting arguments put forth by Sri Appayya Deekshita, and counter arguments by Sri Vijayeendra Theertha and the debates between the different schools of thought have been ongoing since atleast the 12th century - so many granthas put forth by the different schools. So, definitely a few comments here cannot do justice to such a great debate. I intend to make a series of videos on the different schools of thought including the non-vedic & abrahamic & atheistic schools of thought in a few years time.
If in need of an in-depth & authentic technical analysis in English, I would recommend the works of Sri BNK Sharma. Especially, the books - The Brahmasutras and Their Principal Commentaries and History of the Dvaita School of Vedānta and Its Literature - both available in online and hardbound versions (Motilal Banarsidass Publications).
Classic
Some questions:
1) Moksha is subjective ? If innate nature cannot be changed and if somebody's innate nature is to violate the code, Moksha for that jeeva would be to continue violating the code ? This Moksha is same as Moksha of another jeeva whose innate nature is to follow the code ? Not clear.
2) Dr Prathosh says there is nothing good or bad in absolute sense. Yet the verse he quoted from Gita shows Lord Krishna condemning some jeevas as "Adhama". Not clear.
3) By taking a rigid position that "Swabhava" cannot be changed, Dr Prathosh shuts down any possibility of transformation. That's same as Christian notion of eternal damnation after judgement day.
If Moksha isn't subjective, every jeeva will eventually end up in the same space irrespective of how the jeeva conducted himself in this world. The instructions, the do's and don'ts would be useless as the jeeva's destiny will anyhow be fixed. This isn't the view of the Vedas. The Vedas attribute free will, a choice for every jeeva to make his own destiny. Coming to the second point that since nature or svabhava (not to be confused with the everyday term of nature - svabhava is the identity of the jeeva irrespective of his current existential nature that's temporary and transient) cannot be changed, can there be jeevas who violate the code (assuming code is the do's and don'ts of scriptures)? Yes, certainly. Since every jeeva has free will, he is given a choice to accept or reject at will. However, as stated previously, according to the code (the Vedas), such jeevas will not end up with the jeevas who followed the code. Here, the term moksha needs to be made clear - think of moksha as graduation / exit. Does every student graduate? Yes, every student eventually exits - can pass with flying colors, can just pass or can fail too. Graduation or exit is moksha. The college / examination is not doing anything more than evaluating whatever the student's capacity is and is only certifying that student's capability. So, the students who fail (the bad svabhava jeevas) are not forced to fail by the university. On the contrary, every student is given an equal opportunity to excel. Out of his or her own choices, the student becomes responsible for his merit. The same applies here.
Good or bad is very much subjective when you consider different sources of truths to distinguish good or bad. One country's terrorist is another country's martyr. Keeping this in mind, there is something that can be resolutely classified as good, given that we all agree with the same rules of code - the Vedas, as you pointed out from the Gita. Lord Sri Krishna takes the standpoint of the Vedas and classifies jeevas as Uttama & Adhama based on the Vedas. At the same time, there was Duryodhana who would classify himself as Uttama from his own standpoint.
About the third point, Svabhava is the nature of the jeeva - which is not forced upon him - this is rather the jeeva himself. The jeeva will change if he wants to change and that change is something that cannot be forced on the jeeva. There is possibility of transformation if the jeeva is willing to do so. There's free will for every jeeva. If you consider the bad natured jeevas, these are jeevas that are absolutely resolute in making the choices that they make, not out of force, but out of their own free will and are not willing to change, out of their own free will. No one is forcing them to change / or to not change. Coming to the point of eternal damnation, the last chapters of the Gita too speak of eternal damnation in the sense that such jeevas who always make the choices that make them suffer are never going to make the choices that get them out of their suffering, out of their own free will - no one is going to force them to make the choices leading to their misery. Such jeevas put themselves eternally in misery. To give a simple example, a habitual gambler continues to pour in his money and continues to lose out on every rupee years after years out of his own free will, without anyone forcing him to do so, thereby condemning himself to that state and no amount of 'change' forced upon him by good-natured jeevas can get him to change, unless he himself wills so.
@@VedicDiscourses
Dear Sir/madam.
1) So you say Moksha is subjective & for a jeeva whose innate nature is to defy God's codes, his "Moksha" would be to reach eternal hell! Sounds funny...😁 I am saying it in a lighter sense...it makes good comedy...
2) An enemy soldier is martyr in his mother country but a Terrorist is Martyr nowhere!! Definitely not in principle. A rapist is definitely wrong, isn't it ? It is this principle that's universal, right ? How are you then saying there is nothing good or bad & it's all obeying or disobeying codes ? Are you trying to sound accommodative ?
3) The left side traffic analogy is nowhere close in magnitude, gravity & severity to the "codes" of God. God's codes become universal right ? Otherwise how can some jeevas be "Adhama" ? When Lord Krishna is saying some jeevas are Adhama, is God's view point mere individualistic ? Not universal ? After all He is God!
3) What you are saying without saying is that God's codes are indeed universal and goal is to discover if we are aligned with them or not, am I right ? Then I think you should stop saying there is nothing really good or bad as you did in first part of the talk.
@@jayalakshmammatumminakatte9395 I am going through your points one by one. I don't get the humor in the first point. Taking the same university example as before, no student aims to fail. But his choices inevitably lead there. About the second point, the example is to show that the book of codes that decide on who is good / bad can change depending on what the jeeva is choosing - thereby making the principle subjective. The third point - how can there be any other set of codes to distinguish good / bad while the Lord himself is declaring in the Gita. In this statement, the source of truth to classify the jeevas is the Lord / Gita / Vedas, which is correct. So, Lord Krishna and every other jeeva who follows the Lord would classify the jeevas likewise - no arguments there. However, according to the jeevas who follow a set of rules other than the Gita / Vedas / Lord, they can absolutely say otherwise based on their texts of truths / opinions that go against the Vedas / Gita. That point is acknowledged here with the traffic analogy. I didn't really get the last point. Feel free to drop a mail for further discussions on the subject matter. Mail id: vedic.discourses@gmail.com
@@VedicDiscourses We can take up in mail.
You have to explain jeeva,Karma &Dharma in English only
It is a very good attempt in explaining Vedic philosophy through Acharya Madhva's views. But superficial explanation of many things are not fully satisfying.
1) The concept that nothing is absolutely right or wrong and depends on place and circumstances (example of driving car in different countries) is not correct. The example does not hold good for universal truths. Right or Wrong has to be decided on the basis of Shaastras ( ಸದಾಗಮ) . Unfortunately there are dozens of interpretation of the ಸದಾಗಮಾs and every achaarya or their followers claim only their interpretation is correct. Does it mean followers of other Achaaryas have no hope of salvation?
2) God's prerane was compared to a voltage source. It was also claimed that all jeevas have free will. It was mentioned that God does not interfere in anything to do with karma or free will or circumstances but only acts as a source of energy just like a battery connected to a fan or a bulb. Actually God is much more than a voltage source and there is nothing called free will. Everything happens through the Will of God. God first wills and therefore we will (ಬಿಂಬ ಪ್ರತಿಬಿಂಬ ಭಾವ) . Without his Will not even a blade of grass moves. To give an example, earthquakes happen because God willed it to happen and not because Earth willed it. So God not only created this universe but directly controlling and interfering and micromanaging it so to say. He will never give Freedom to anyone and as per shastras, we should not desire freedom. Even Mahalakshmi or liberated souls do not have freedom. So where is the question of free will?
3) The concept of ಅನಾದಿ ಕರ್ಮ is intriguing. Even the concept of infinite jeevas is not fully satisfactory. What exactly is meant by infinite number of jeevas? Eternally growing number of jeevas??
How did jeeva have karma before one fine day God decided to give it "janma"? Did it do karma only through the medium of linga shareera? How is it possible? Even assuming that it did, it must have been through prerane of God only. I honestly think lot of tough questions are brushed aside under the mysterious concepts of Anaadi Karma and Anantha jeevaru ideas.
4) It also looks like , at a time, God catches hold of some jeevas, makes them go through cycle of birth and death and at the end of kalpa "liberates"them. Then again, he brings in fresh set of jeevas. Which jeeva he chooses is again known only to God. The question is why doesn't God complete this exercise for all jeevas in one go unless number of jeevas are continuously increasing every second?
5) It was also mentioned that God does not interfere with our Karma but just acts as a source of EMF. But shastras say that after bhagavad aparoksha (ಬಿಂಬ ಸಾಕ್ಷಾತ್ಕಾರ), all sanchita and agaami karmaas are destroyed or made ineffective. Also it is a practical experience that prayers reduce the intensity of prarabda karma.
6) It is said that even after aparoksha, one has to suffer prarabda karma before moksha but only protected from sanchita and aagaami. Why??
Also it is said that ಕೃಷ್ಣಾರ್ಪಣ ಬುದ್ಧಿ ಯಿಂದ ಮಾಡಿದ ಕೆಲಸಕ್ಕೆ, ಕರ್ಮ ಲೇಪ ಇರಲ್ಲ ಅಂತಾರೆ. What is the rational explanation for this?
Thanks and regards.
Very deep & intriguing set of arguments. Let me directly pass this onto Dr. Prathosh. Shall get back to you as soon as possible.
Please send a mail to prathoshap@gmail.com with this set of points. Please do include me in the cc (vedic.discourses@gmail.com) so that I can consolidate and paste the conversation here for the benefit of all after the discussion.
Thought provoking questions
@@VedicDiscourses Please can you share the reply from Dr Prathosh for this
@@AnandKishoreFan I have brought this to Dr Prathosh's notice.
I appreciate this, but if you would have explained your field what you have actually studied that would be better.
Some of things you explained are not proven, and is people have different opinions. Example Dwait, Adwait people says their philosophy is proved beyond doubt but still Dwait, Adwait and Vishtadwait still there, all are different opinion, but all 3 followers failed to prove thier philosophy.
But what you have studied is proven, reproducible, until unless you can't show, prove, or reproduce what you said, it is difficult understand.
Regarding what Dr Prathosh has studied, I think I have covered it in the intro at the beginning. Could you be a bit more specific on what unproven concepts you are referring to? Every philosophy claims to be the true path. It’s up to us to go through the debates and decide for ourselves. We do have our free will. There’s abundant texts in each of the schools of Vaidika Mathas written over the past 6-8 centuries. I do have plans to make video series on a detailed comparison of the main tenets of the vaidika philosophies. Not sure when it’ll materialise.
Regarding proof of philosophy, I think they have put forth solid arguments in their favour - no shortage of texts here, since the past 6-8 centuries. Such a debate on the schools of thought is out of scope for the topic taken up in this video.
Adwait, Dwait, Vishistadwait, and other different philosophy all are arguing, saying that "our philosophy is valid one", rest of the philosophies are not valid, then probably one may be valid or may not be, or all are valid(because all are argued).
Until unless proven, reproducible,everyone able to see it, every one able to learn. experience it, feel it, then that philosophy difficult to understand.
Coming to science, technology and maths,
here none of the field argue "our field valid one".every field here it is proven, reproducible,everyone able to see it, every one able to learn it. experience it, feel it, hence no question of argument.
Argument or argument debate or set of argument text not required when "it is proven, reproducible,everyone able to see it, every one able to learn it. experience it, feel it"
@@AJ-fo3hp "Adwait, Dwait, Vishistadwait, and other different philosophy all are arguing, saying that "our philosophy is valid one" - True. As part of our jignasa, we go through their arguments and determine for ourselves as to what's right. We have our will.
"Coming to science, technology and maths,
here none of the field argue "our field valid one".every field here it is proven, reproducible,everyone able to see it, every one able to learn it." - I'm afraid the tenets of proving philosophical concepts is drastically different from the tools used to prove/disprove mathematical concepts. Mainly because the subject of debate is beyond sense perception. Regarding reproducibility and experience, that indeed is done and is the basis for one's acceptance or dismissal of philosophy. We can perhaps take a material example for this - for a person to have "faith" in yoga, one needs to put in a good diet, dedicate some time and effort in practicing yoga with good sleeping habits to actually experience the benefits of what's promised. Similarly, there's a way of thought, a way of learning, a procedure that requires a dedicated effort to experience what's promised - different with different schools of thought. As the popular saying goes - the proof of the pudding is in the eating. We are intelligent enough to decide for ourselves. But can we have a scientific tool to just put the concept under a test - say a litmus test that turns blue on being right? Definitely not. Given our tools of knowledge, philosophy is seeking out someone who's far far beyond our senses of taste, smell or sight. Regarding proofs in philosophical evaluation, I would recommend Pramana Paddhati, an excellent treatise on what constitutes or what's acceptable as proof, given our state of senses & knowledge.
Till date, I have never come across any satisfactory sanskrit equivalent to the word 'free will'. Whether we have free will or not is a question that seems to arise only with the learning of the English language! Iccha shakti and Kartatva cant be satisfactorily regarded as free will.
Moreover, its not a true surrender to God if one still wishes to latch onto even the concept of free will.