List of questions with timestamps: 00:00 - Intro 01:51 - What separates the individual soul from Brahman? 08:53 - Can the self be self-aware without mind or object? 16:26 - You have said that maya projects the universe and veils the truth. Is this the same as the Samkhya philosophy? 25:50 - What is the closest concept in Vedanta to the ideas of the spirit and the soul? 39:39 - Is Advaita Vedanta escapism? 48:09 - Is Vedanta the same as subjective idealism? 55:15 - How can I be sure that consciousness is not manufactured by the brain?
Dear Vedanta New York, Please start publishing Swami Sarvapriyananda talks as books, they are needed to many generations, many spiritual seekers around the world.🙏🙏🙏
Hi pranam to Maharaj ji . I will be really grateful if Swamiji answers my questions: what is the point of achieving career goals etc. Should I leave everything then ? Should I not strive to do better ? Also if I have limited free will, what is the point of trying , if I will always be limited ?
This guy is really the equivalent of how R.C. Zaehner described Vivekanda, a teacher who breathed new life into a system of thought which in the hands of others can be quite austere and unappealing. I am not a nondualist. I am a thorough-going & proud "card carrying Dualist" of the Catholic neo-Thomist Variety, but I luv listening to this guy!!!!!
Answering to an invitation to America Ramana Maharshi is reported to have said that America is here only. And he wasn't joking. Now what does that mean? I like to know whether Swami is making a concession vis-à-vis the level of the questioner by giving such an answer or he thinks that that is the enlightened perspective of this (apparent? ) universe. If Central Park exist when you are not aware of it, it means that space is real. The time that you will take to reach Central Park is real. If the concepts like outside, inside, here, there, now, then.. are all really real even after realization, how is going to bring about the fabled 'dhukkanivirthi and ananda prapti'? Your position is very disheartening especially because you are not one of the best, but the best nondual teacher living today. (If Swami doesn't answer, someone who is 'in the know'please answer. I am really confused )
I feel truly blessed by getting introduced to swami Sarvapriya Nanda by my ex boss who lives in the US. This was almost 2 months ago N now on every day i hear him for min one hour. I am literally addicted to his discourse. I am gradually becoming truly spiritual. I had so many questions about life which Swami ji has answered. He is so knowledgeable N ao unassuming. His language is immaculate N yet simple.
Thanks for another set of Q&A, although more basic ones this time, with the exception of the last one 55:15. Regarding Vivekananda's criterions for discernment of Truth, isn't it obvious the whole society and culture imposes ignorance ie. non-Truth on all of us ? Isn't it actually its main purpose, keep people crippled, diminished , divided and deluded ? Already hijacked family members and friends, education system, media, politics - all involved ? I believe infants are free from ignorance. We do cast it on them later, mostly without being aware of that.
About last question: I wonder what happens with those persons that are back to life after brain/body died and state to be conscious of themselves being death and Dr., Family, nurses around speaking, crying around the death body but still they remain untouched as pure bliss consciousness ...some state they don't want to go back to body as they experience such a bliss .
Please provide swami sarvapriyananda lecutres in hindi also. So that Hindi knowing people can understand. कृपया स्वामी सर्वप्रियानंद जी को कहें कि हिंदी में भी lectures दें । 🙏
Creation was propelled by 'desire'to become many. But brahman could not become as it was only the existence therefore it appeared as jivas just the real sun appears as many suns in buckets of water!!
What I find very troubling about Advaita Vedanta is that I think it deals inadequately with the relation of the subject to the object. While it may be true to say that one is the subject and not what one experiences, that leaves out the reality of the pain involved. Saying one is not the body does absolutely nothing to resolve the problem of the body's ills. Put your hand in fire and tell me it is not your pain, even though you are not the pain but the one experiencing the pain. You can separate the subject from the object all day, but in real life pain hurts. Losing a bodily function, for instance, is not something one can isolate oneself from, even though theoretically one is the witness. Try witnessing your arm being torn off, for example; what use is this philosophy when it counts? It demands that we not be human, which is not an inconsiderable problem. It sounds great when you hear it, but when you finally realize what it takes to make it work, one realizes having no preferences is a tall, tall order, and without that, it's all talk and hopeful feelings and nothing more. This is my opinion, of course and perhaps of no value to anyone else.
very true . But that is applicable to all philosophy in general and not limited to only Advaita . Every philosophy , by definition , is just a search for truth, knowledge and shaping our worldviews thus . It helps us in solving day-to-day problems of attachment , emotions , depression, failure , etc . It may not necessarily deal with extreme situations such as torture or chronic pain . Their "target -audience" is the "normal man" . Having said that , I do feel there are some hidden /subtle messages even for the "non-target audience" within certain philosophies . For example , some Tibetan Buddhist practise Idealism(thinking of pain to be made up in mind and as ephemeral) to a very great level by voluntarily training under extreme situations of agony (mental and physical) . Similarly , I can think of many stories of Advaitins ,such as Sadashiva Brahmendra(who calmy walked away smiling , without the slightest sign of pain , even when his hand was chopped off by a Muslim ruler) , Shirdi Sai Baba (who cut himself and pulled out his intestines , again without any noticeable pain ) , Guru Tej Bahadur (who was tortured by the tyrant Aurangzeb , by boiling him alive ; he remained stoic as always ) , Mansur Hallaj ( brutally tortured for claiming An-al -Haq , yet his composure was unperturbed) . Whether they actually felt the pain , yet faked their stoic-ness , or didnt feel the pain , or felt the pain and didnt care , we cannot say . What we can say is , to put on that kind of stoicness , under such torturous situations is a Super-Oscar- winning-acting , or they naturally felt that stoicness owing to their height of the core of philosophies they subscribed to . And even Science cannot help much with extreme chronic/acute pain . Situations are always not favorable./moral /legal to everyone . Society always puts people through such hells and we can say it is inevitable , even in modern tech-medical advanced society (such as evidences of torture in ISIS , war traumas , brutality and violence , chronic pain by newer and newer diseases ,psychological disorders like pureOCD , severe depression , psychosis , etc) Buddha's words ring in my ears -"Life is suffering" . Happy Buddha Purnima !
It is also mentioned subtle and gross body can come only from tamas pradhana prakruthi is it that for the jiva to exhaust Sukha and Dhukha subtle body is req hence gross body 1st ch of PD
At Adyapeeth we see Lord Krishna and Mãã Radha at top followed by Mãã Kali and then the Guru . But I know Guru as Bramha, Vishnu and Maheswar ( Shiva), there is no existence without Guru then why he is at the bottom in the order of the Altar? Am a disciple of a pure bliss ( Paramhans), the saturated body.
@Ganesh MclHi, for those of us who have not been initiated by a guru, can they practice mantra meditation, if yes how can one choose the right mantra? And how to avoid changing the mantra now and then? I think when a guru gives you a mantra there's some power behind that, so you stick to it no matter what, but how to retain that same faith when we choose a mantra by ourselves?
How can Brahman be the knower, when the Truth is that the Brahman is already THE All Knowing One/omniscient/Absolute Knowledge/Gnana/Knowledge itself....? what is it that the Brahman has to know (what is left for Brahman to know) by being the knower.. as its already the All knowing one..
hi i have a problem with the concept of absolute of nisargadatta maharaj. he and other spiritual speakers say that this absolute which they called parabrahman is beyond consciousness or prior to consciousness. So the i am is not perceieved and it seems to me like a state of uncosciousness where there is no awareness of the being (a sort of great void). can somebody clarify this to me cause it seems scary and confusing where after death the soul or god does not know its being
Nisargadatta Maharaj terminology can be confusing and there can be possible misinterpretation in translation. Ramana Maharshi's teaching is consistent and is in total agreement with Advaita Vedanta (AV). Self is not aware of itself as an object but is definitely Self aware, it is direct not like knowing an object. Do not go away with the understanding that Self is a zombie principle. Please refer to verse 12 & 33 of Bhagwan's Ulladu Narpadu. It will be clear.
@@arjunrathore8950 thank you so much. Yeah the teachings of Ramana are way better and clearer than nisargatta. Infact i had no problem with those i will stick to Ramana and advaita
@@arjunrathore8950 u remember we had a conversation a year ago. Self is not aware of itself as an object but is definitely Self aware, it is direct not like knowing an object. // i have found conflicting answers to this question in discourse of different saints. the question is in disembodied liberation when turiya alone remains , and three states are not there does it know itself(of course not as an object) or is self aware? shankara in his long commentary on brahmavali(taiittriya bhasya) No; for, the passage is intended to convey a definition of the Infinite.-The śruti quoted above, “where one sees nothing else......” is intended to define the nature of the Infinite (Bhūman’. Taking for granted the prevalent notion that “what one sees is something else, (something other than one’s own self), the śruti here gives us to know the nature of the Infinite in the words “where there is no seeing of something else, that is the Infinite.” Since the words “something else” are used in the śruti where it seeks to deny what we prima facie understand by seeing etc.,[6] the passage cannot convey the idea that one can act upon (i. e., know) one’s own Self. Owing to the absence of duality in one’s own Self, there can be no knowing of one’s own Self. If the Self were the thing known, there would be no knower, inasmuch as the Self is concerned in the act only as the thing known. It cannot be contended that the one Self alone is concerned in both ways, both as the knower and as the known; for, as devoid of parts, the one Self cannot be both the knower and the known simultaneously. Being indivisible, the Self cannot, indeed, be the known and the knower, at the same time. similary in kena bhasya(verse 12) Hence the meaning of the expression ‘Pratibodhaviditam matam’ is just what we explained it to be. Some, however, explain that the drift of this portion of the text is that the Atman is knowable by itself. There the Atman is thought of as conditioned and people talk of knowing the Atman by the Atman, distinguishing as it were, the unconditioned Atman from the Atman conditioned by intelligence, etc. Thus it has been said “He sees the Atman by the Atman” and “O Best of men! know the Atman by the Atman, thyself.” It is clear that the unconditioned Atman, being one, is not capable of being known either by itself or by others. Being itself the knowing principle, it cannot stand in need of another knowing principle; just as one light cannot possibly require another light. is shankracharya intent is to knock out any possibility of self-awareness (not only .not as an object which is obvious, but other mysterious means where it is not an object) in 'DEFINITION' or principle in any case? or he charged against it as in the general parlance, awareness requires the presence of triads, and he is keen to preserve the turiya or brahman in parMartha from the influx of triads. it can still lead to alternate possibility that it can know itself/self-aware, yet polluting triads don't appear, strangely, divinely and is incomprehensible to human minds?
@@Mo1hit thanks for your comment. I was just thinking of you the other day with regards to our discussion on Ajatavada. I have now come to realize that there was a serious flaw in my understanding during our last conversation. I will get into that later. But let’s take the question of Self Awareness first. I have spent lot of time on this and verified from 3 experts and also there is backing from sruti ( sruti backing is a must). I have run this by David Godman, Michael James and I have found the answers in Swami Parmarthananda lectures on Madukya Karika and BS (unfortunately I do not have his email address otherwise I would have stalked him :)) and also have a sruti reference. I can send you verbatim what they have told me if you connect with me on email (rathore.arjun at gmail dot com). Here is the answer. There is no knower in Self, that is 100% correct. As soon as we add “er” (e.g knower) or in sanskrit “ta” (e.g. gyata) we are talking about action and also duality. There is no action in Self. Does that mean Self is a zombie? Absolutely no. A robot is like a zombie, has so clue about its existence, totally unaware, inert. So after the knowledge of Brahman will I be a zombie? That does not make sense. If that were so I would prefer to be ignorant. Sat and Chit are always together. Consciousness without existence is meaningless and Existence without consciousness is meaningless. So if you find in any text that says Self does not know itself, it implies does not know itself as an object, because as I mentioned there is duality and action in knower. Everything unreal has real as its basis. When we have this experience of the world not all of it is unreal. The reality is mixed in there. “I AM” ( Sat Chit) is misunderstood, due to maya/ignorance there is superimposition and our experience is I AM this or I AM that. Ego appropriates “I AM” and causes all the trouble. You must be already knowing that, Swami Sarvapriyananda also talks a lot about it, this “I AM” is available effortlessly to us all the time, specially evident in our waking state. As soon as you think about it, start thinking about “your existence” then intellect gets involved. I am not talking about that, I am talking about effortless awareness. When you are highly focused on something, immersed in some exceptional work that you lose yourself in it, even then there is this general sense of self existence, not deliberate. To know others (prameya) you employ the sense (pramana), the whole triputi/triad is involved. In “I AM” there is no prameya or pramana. Triputi rises together, if there is no pramana and prameya, then what good is the pramata. The Self gives itself away in “I AM”. This is Self awareness. Jnani always abides in “I AM”, for ignorant folks like me it is all mixed up (I AM this & that). In fact the only thing Self knows is itself ( I am using “know” loosely). What about all this experience? We will get to that. I recently resolved my misunderstanding on this. Let’s take that next and we will end with sruti. I had this misunderstanding that somehow this experience is presented to the Self. I was so so wrong. I did have some doubts on this and hence I was pursuing this for clarification. Now I have the right understanding. Experience does not touch the Self. Nothing touches Self. It is asangaha, that is why Ajatavada is the ultimate truth. When I say, I am having an experience, is the statement correct? Yes and No. Depends on what you mean by I? If you take yourself as a “knower” then yes you are having the experience, if you take yourself as turiyam/Self then, no you are not having the experience. Self enables the experience but does not participate in the experience. It just illumines the knower and the known. The standard example which Advaita Vedanta (AV) uses is of a Sun shining on buckets filled with water. Each bucket has a reflection of Sun. That reflection is effected by the quality of the water. Now tell me, does the Sun have anything to do with the reflection? Is it attached to that reflection? No. Similarly reflected consciousness is not same as pure consciousness in that it is diluted by the reflecting medium. Only when the mind is 100% purified then the reflected consciousness can be said to be same as the pure consciousness. Experience begins and ends with the knower. There is no experience in the Self. Self is not the experiencer. Then what is Self? Self is sakshi, the “silent” witness. Pay attention to “silent” and there is no “er” in witness. Swami Sarvapriyananda always says that AV is taking your from known to unknown, step by step. The prakarana granthas the introductory texts will talk about the observer and the observed. It is taking you first to the knower, if it straightaway took you to sakshi you will not get it. Even in prakarna grantha also they will clarify that knower is not the ultimate. Somehow this confusion is there the Self is the observer, I also was having some of that confusion. I see this confusion in more than 99% of the folks in these AV facebook groups I am in. But the fact is, I have nothing to do with the knower, I just illumine it. I have nothing to do with this experience, it is the knowers problem. Nothing touches me. I AM. So the trick is not to watch the ego, there is no watching in “I AM”. One just has to just “be”. That’s it. Now let’s come to sruti. The seventh mantra of Mandukya is highly potent. It has all the answers. You will get the clarity if you listen to Swami Parmarthananda’s 9th and 10th lecture of chapter 1 of Mandukya Karika(it is available in archive.org). He is simply brilliant. नान्तःप्रज्ञं न बहिःप्रज्ञं नोभयतःप्रज्ञं न प्रज्ञानघनं न प्रज्ञं नाप्रज्ञम् | अदृश्यमव्यवहार्यमग्राह्यमलक्षणमचिन्त्यमव्यपदेश्यमेकात्मप्रत्ययसारं प्रपञ्चोपशमं शान्तं शिवमद्वैतं चतुर्थं मन्यन्ते स आत्मा स विज्ञेयः || 7 || The first part of the mantra ( नान्तःप्रज्ञं न बहिःप्रज्ञं नोभयतःप्रज्ञं न प्रज्ञानघनं न प्रज्ञं नाप्रज्ञम् ) it is telling Turiyam is not the knower of 3 states ( it is not the waker, not the dreamer, nor the sleeper, nor some intermediary state, nor the Lord the knower of all). Then is it inert? No it is not inert. The second part of the mantra ( अदृश्यमव्यवहार्यमग्राह्यमलक्षणमचिन्त्यमव्यपदेश्यमे) it is telling Turiyam is not the 3 prameyas ( waker’s world, dreamer’s world, sleeper’s world). Then what it is? The third part of the mantra ( कात्मप्रत्ययसारं प्रपञ्चोपशमं शान्तं शिवमद्वैतं चतुर्थं मन्यन्ते स आत्मा स विज्ञेयः ) is telling even though it is different from 3 knowers and 3 known it “illumines” all of them. Ekamapratyasaram is a crucial world. It is that which is common in the three states, I AM. When we are extroverted, looking outwards as a knower then all this is experienced. Trick is to turn back (introverted) and be the illuminator of the knower.
Poor scientists, wasting their lives trying to stuff consciousness into their materialist model of reality. It is a naive pursuit that is doomed to fail.
As a Jiva, am not conscious of my neighbor.. am only conscious of my body/mind.. So is this not individual consciousness? Unlike Brhaman who is conscious of all the Jivas and in fact everything/ALL that exists.. so our individual consciousness of the Jiva is limited to our body/mind.. unlike the universal Consciousness... This is the case in the manifested state...as it exists today... And it will remain so eternally (Jiva continues to remain distinct even upon Mukthi), as the Jivas are eternal parts of the whole...Universal Conciousness is infinite.. that does not rule out the existence of the individual consciousness... as there can be no limit to the amount of light present (even in a small room)...for example.. we can keep on adding (in fact manifesting from the whole) more and more light (parts) which in no way can cause the infinite light to run out of space etc...This is the case even with Light in a small room.. then one can imagine the inconceivable mighty Lord.. though he is infinite consciousness, that in no way rules out the existence of individual consciousness (Jiva) which is the case today... and will eternally remain so (even upon the Jiva attaining Moksha)...And in fact in the case of light.. there can be two (infact as many) infinites existing simultaneously even in a small room... (same with consciousness.. (part and the whole)) though logically it is not conceivable by the mind... but such is the inconceivable nature of the LORD...So many infinites (Light or Consciousness) remaining as part and whole, eternally existing together....same with Bliss/Gnana... and existence.. etc...
SANATHANI 'S QUESTION ? 100,00,000 rupees OFFER QUESTION YOU SHOULD INCLUDE IN YOUR DEBATE ALWAYS. ALLAH CREATED THAT AND THIS, JESUS CREATED THAT AND THAT WHAT IS THE SPECIAL THING THAT ALLAH OR JESUS CREATED SPECIALLY FOR THE MUSLIMS OR CHRISTIANS WHICH IS NOT CREATED FOR OTHERS. TELL ME AT LEAST ONE THING IN THE ENTIRE WORLD OR UNIVERSE? IF ANY ONE SHOWS atleast onething SANATHANI IS READY TO GO INTO THEIR RELIGION
Firstly, my sincere gratitude from a fellow Calcuttan to the swami for opening up a whole new world of Vedantan spiritual science n philosophy. Secondly, just to clarify the concept of the term 'spirit', etymologically it is from the Latin word 'spiritus' or the verb ' 'spirare' meaning to breathe. This was borrowed from the Greek word 'pneuma' as you rightly pointed out, meaning the same thing. In fact the words inspire n expire simply mean, in breathing/inhalation, out breathing/exhalation and respiration is repeat process. When the body dies, we say expire, the final breath, or the pranic life force has left. Just thought I'd share that. ✌👉😎. T.
Hi Swami Sarvapriyananda, Could you please let me know how someone like me can ask you a question online? I've watched your Drg Drsya Viveka, Aparokshanubhuti, a little of Mandukya Upanishad, few videos of yours delivered at IIT Kanpur, and right now am listening to ur Bhagavadgita talks on youtube. But I didn't understand how can I ask you a question! During this pandemic I understand that the BG talks are happening online (zoom?). So, everyone is asking you questions online. So, I thought it will be nice if me too gets the opportunity. Please respond
@@dorothywarren1441 do u mean there is a drop down box in a video frame and address is written on that? or, do u mean in the youtube video description section of some of those videos?
Revered SIR I profusely thank you for all your efforts and I have become ur greatest lover. By You I mean not ur body or mind but u the Consciousness. What u painstakingly acquired over so many years, you have given us in a matter of few hours. May God grant u whatsoever ur heart desires. Koti koti pranaam.
Ohm Shanti Swami, Does tatvas (elements) have consciousness awareness within themselves ? Can you please help me understand the relation between tatvas and bhraman ? 🙏🏼
Swami talks about the subjective idealism of the Vijñānavāda school of Buddhism (also called Yogacara), but I want to point out that subjective idealism does not describe the entirety of this school! One part of it certainly is subjective idealism, but there’s another part that is definitely not to be reduced to it. If you’re interested in this topic, I recommend the series of lectures of Dr. Jay Garfield at Sravasti Abbey called “Emptiness and the Mind Perceiving It”. (By the way, Swami has studied with Dr. Garfield at Harvard)
Thank you for the pointer to Prof. Garfield’s lecture series. Really cool stuff! Just watched the first lecture and, as a Vedantin, I could not agree more with the following observation by the professor “Doxography is a really valuable thing but doxography can be dangerous because doxographic treatises are always written from a particular standpoint and always from the standpoint of whoever takes themselves to be at the top of that particular hierarchy. Although people tend to be very careful and charitable about painting their own position, they tend either to be not as careful or as charitable as one might like in characterizing the positions of their opponents. They can set them up as strawmen for refutation.” While Prof. Garfield was speaking of doxography with reference to Buddhist schools such as Yogacara and Madhyamaka, I think this observation applies equally to Vedanta vis-à-vis Buddhism as well as it pertains to doxography from both these traditions in characterizing each other.
@@rsr9200 That's exactly what I had in mind! In his series of lectures, he has to come back to this point very very often. If we set aside for a moment our preconceptions about a certain tradition (that we've heard from its opponents!) and listen to it directly, we can definitely learn something and benefit from it. By the way, I think Yogacara has astonishing similarities with Advaita Vedanta. Understanding one helps a lot in understanding the other.
@@arielpalmer Finally finished watching the entire 15-part lecture series spanning nearly 30 hours. Thankful for the opportunity to learn a little bit about the relationship between the Yogacara and Madhyamaka schools of Buddhism from Prof Garfield, a truly gifted teacher endowed with a rare combination of erudition and eloquence. These lectures not only deepened my admiration for these Buddhist schools of thought but also reinforced my conviction that Advaita Vedanta offered the best path for my spiritual growth through its elegant formulation of non-dual reality and its accommodation of a God-centered spiritual practice. My only disappointment with Prof Garfield’s narrative in these lectures was his reliance on a hackneyed caricature of Vedanta which seems prevalent in Buddhist doxography. After hearing his warning about the dangers of doxography in his first lecture, I was hoping that he would give Vedanta a fair shake but sadly that was not to be. Nonetheless, I would highly recommend this lecture series to Vedantins interested in a nuanced view of Yogacara.
It's strange that I come across comments from people I have seen overtime. Not that I know a thing about then it has become like a family. People across the globe watches swami who breaks the internet everytime. Cheers to people in here. And ofcourse can't help admiring vedanta and his explanation.
It's weird though. Seems that no matter what topic my question of the day seems to be I can watch nearly ANY lecture by Swamiji and a solution to it will appear either directly from his lips or in my mind. It's like he aligns my mind to the right something and my mind works better while I am listening to him. That has happened to me so many times that it cannot be coincidence.
I do remember Dave Chalmers (the person Swami mentioned) telling me once (about 30 years ago when we were grad students at Indiana U, Bloomington) that the reason he decided to not become a mathematician is that he was convinced that even pure mathematics and theoretical physics would never be able to answer the real big questions. So he turned to cognitive science. Unfortunately this is still limited since it is within a material framework. Brahman can never be completely "understood" in such a framework since Brahman is devoid of all properties/qualities.
Vijay Krish. Your comment is really interesting. Have just listened to Dave chalmers and thought the same as you. Have you heard of Bernardo kalstrup? He is while not being a follower of Vedanta, a non dualist and non materialist. Kalstrup has doctorates in computer science and philosophy. His thinking is quite close to that of Swami Ji. I think the answer to the nature of conscious will ultimately come from a non dualist non materialist view....I,e, the vedantist view. Western materialist view on consciousness does not seem to be cutting it.
@Girl Sage try reading the New Testament and Bible generally, from a vedantist non dualistic perspective. Jesus Christ ... the kingdom of god is within you. Psalm 82 v 6 You are. Gods . In other words you are Brahman. Also John 10 v 34. Have I not said ye are all Gods? I.e. all part of Brahman. Jesus was essentially a non dualist .... the Father and I are one. He as an incarnated man is one with God or Brahman.
@Girl Sage Jesus also promises eternal punishment for finite sins. Seems he. Lost his temper quite a bit. Cursing the fig tree for not bearing fruit...out of season. Using a whip to clear the temple. Anyways you are entitled to ure opinion and belief. Have a peaceful and joyous life. ☺️
It seems magical this play of consciousness which seems to spew out the world and its objects then merge it back into itself. the world seems like a mirage. Thank you swamiji once again. (The prince of kashi story I like to hear again and again)
Perfect.. The Jiva and the Prakriti are part of Brahman... Both Jiva and the material nature are ultimately made of the same material ( or an element or Spiritual element, if i may say so, to denote what they both are made of).. as what Brahman is made of which can be called as Consciousness (as well as Knowledge/Bliss)..(Sat Chit Ananda being the very essence of the Atman and these three being inseparable and intrinsic nature of the Atman) and To the Jivas, the nature may appear as insentient... But in reality, it is the very essence of Brahman or Consciousness that appears or is projected/is manifested as Jiva and Prakriti.. but then the important thing to note is that though they are made of the same essence of Brahman/Consciousness (Aham Brahmasmi - The Jiva is of the same essence as Brahman in every respect/ He is the same as Brahman in Quality but not in quantity.. so he remains as eternal part of the whole... ), they remain as part of the whole eternally... and so the Jiva is an eternal experiencer .. (Vishishtadvaita) as far as i could see... As the Upanishads reveal/declare that The Brahman manifests this universe and the Jivas, out of HIMSELF.. The material out of which they are made of being HIMSELF.. He being the Nimitta kāraṇa and Upādāna kāraṇa and ..the third Karana as well).... And the beauty here is that though we are made of the very essense of Brahman (Aham Brahmasmi), we as individual Jivas do have freedom (though limited, as Freedom as well is the quality of Brhaman) and he remains to be a part eternally.. Brahman is such inconceivable in that his manifestation is such that the though Jiva is a part of himself,/Brahman, Jiva as an experiencer is very individualistic/independent entity (though he is a part of the whole), in the sense that though the very experience is Brahman (or that though the Brahman precisely measures and offers the very experience to the Jiva), The Brahman is NOT the EXPERIENCER here.. he remains eternally ALOOF of the Jivas experience... that is to say that the Brahman is never the experiencer.. but the Jiva is.. thats how inconceivable the Bhraman IS... And also the experience in our dreams are VERY REAL.. in spite of this experience coming from a Dream to the Jivas.. So though its only a dream, there IS experience to the Jiva from the Dreams .. Some of the Karma are supposed to be experienced through dreams as well, alongside Real daylight (non-dream) experiences... and the non-conscious sleep as well brings experiences to the Jiva... and that is part of ones Karma as well.. How well we sleep and experience sleep/dreams/waking states, are all part of Karma.. The COSMIC Design is such inconceivable!!! SO the Brahman is not the experiencer and this experience of Karma is not for Brahman.. Rather this experience of Karma is precisely measured and offered and delivered to the Jiva BY the Brahman.. So this experience of Karma is for the Jiva as Jiva is the experiencer!!
I love your talks and have great respect for your Tradition and Teachers - your Vedanta in 5 parables is wonderful 🙏 . I was interested in the discussion at the end of this presentation about the differences between idealists and realists . What is your interpretation of Sri Ramana"s Maharshi's words on these matters ? Thank you 🙏🕉️
Swami how can I join your sessions - I have been listening to the UA-cam presentations-Also I would really appreciate if I can get a PDF of Vedanta Sara which you distributed to the students - I eager to learn -I bought the text , however it does not have the Sanskrit script
Swamy ji, I've one question. When the body departs(Sukshma sharisar) does jeeva Aatma too goes with sukshma sharira? I know jeeva Aatma is nothing but Brahman...but why there is dual here? 🙏🙏🙏
About the Self awareness is not how it works. Brahman or the Self is aware of its own being simply by being itself. brahman is aware of its itself, it does not need the mind or the body. Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 1.4.10 Brahman was indeed all this in the beginning. Hence it only knew itself,as I am Brahaman.
Answering to an invitation to America, Ramana Maharshi was reported to have said that 'America is here only'. And He wasn't joking. Now what implication can one take from that statement about the idea of space for a jnani? I very much like to know whether Swami is making a concession vis-à-vis the level of understanding of the questioner by giving such an answer or Swami consideres that is the enlightened perspective of a jnani of this (apparent? ) universe. If Central Park 'exists'(language !) when it is not there in your field of awareness, it means that Space is real. If you go further by the same thread, the time you take to reach Central Park is also real. If concepts like inside-outside, here- there, now-then are all real even after Self-realization, l don't understand how is this so-called realization is going to bring about the fabled 'dhukka nivirthi, and ananda prapthi'. How is it going to make my problems 'unreal'? I have a great love(yes that is the word!) for Swami Sarvapriyananda and l consider him one of the best (at par with Sri Nochur Vengatramam in depth) nondual teachers around. So this is exceptionally disheartening... On a lighter vein, l think it is his association with Mr. Rich Archer and Mr. Rick's 'not no hold barred' nondualitstic positions which are influencing him. (Bad company !) If Swami doesn't feel like answering and someone 'in the know' of this nondual realms feels like answering, please do so. I really need one. This razor edge walking...
"Awareness" and "field of awareness" are not the same. The teaching is that Central Park or any other place in the Universe cannot exist without Awareness, just like the pot cannot exist without the clay.
I wonder what he thinks of working with entities such as Choronzon enochian demon abyss keeper ,as Crowley said the last obstacle to divine union. And can one even function in material reality without an ego,in samadhis states yes but to function i doubt it. Many spiritual people pretend not to have it only for it to a more subtle form of a spiritual identity, the problem is when ego is ruling over awareness .
Just an observation the more you concentrate on individual mind wants and desires and the worldly things the more far away the self/Brahman seems to be and vice versa. The tricks mind plays. Blessed are great souls who have done years of meditation. Thank you swamiji for sharing your knowledge
About the brain and consciousness, Aldous Huxley- I believe it was he- suggested that perhaps the brain was “ a reduction valve “ to mitigate the enormous power of universal consciousness and its effect on the human consciousness. See his essay The Doors of perception
Maharaj ami New York toh jete parbo na...but thakur jodi chaan apnar sathe belur math a dekha hote pare...ami thakur ar kache amar ichhe ta janalam....
As a Jiva, am not conscious of my neighbor.. am only conscious of my body/mind.. So is this not individual consciousness? Unlike Brhaman who is conscious of all the Jivas and in fact everything/ALL that exists.. so our individual consciousness of the Jiva is limited to our body/mind.. unlike the universal Consciousness... This is the case in the manifested state...as it exists today... And it will remain so eternally (Jiva continues to remain distinct even upon Mukthi), as the Jivas are eternal parts of the whole...Universal Conciousness is infinite.. that does not rule out the existence of the individual consciousness... as there can be no limit to the amount of light present (even in a small room)...for example.. we can keep on adding (in fact manifesting from the whole) more and more light (parts) which in no way can cause the infinite light to run out of space etc...This is the case even with Light in a small room.. then one can imagine the inconceivable mighty Lord.. though he is infinite consciousness, that in no way rules out the existence of individual consciousness (Jiva) which is the case today... and will eternally remain so (even upon the Jiva attaining Moksha)...And in fact in the case of light.. there can be two (infact as many) infinites existing simultaneously even in a small room... (same with consciousness.. (part and the whole)) though logically it is not conceivable by the mind... but such is the inconceivable nature of the LORD...
It's not that complicated, just because you exist as an enlightened being doesn't mean that you don't understand that transactional reality exist and the subtle body moves from physical body to physical body and so in that sense there definitely IS such a thing as reincarnation.
What is the different between Telepathy and hypnotism..... In a spiritual life if someone wish to realise how to connect with a person by Telepathy, is it possible?
Agra paschayat,google KO mai kundali sikha sakta hoon . Phek KE to dekho. Sanatani ,hindu zora,ehudi,christ,islam tao huku,con e fucious,lhama ,SIKH,budda jain . Pata nahi to ITNA pata to pata HAI humara thikana gulabi NAGAR hai. Bolo mayajal,the internet!
There was a doubt about soul and brahman, it got cleared. 😊But one thing is, when an individual person discerns b/w the subject and object , why it is not that the other persons are also subject? Though physical appearance is considered to be maya, even the body of investigators' too. But ultimately enlightenment is for for human being, not for the objects. So why not every other human is also subject for every other individual from very beginning of investigation ? And is the projecting "Power" of maya also brahman?
Subject is the one who experiences. When you look around. It's you who is experiencing the world outside. Hence there is only one subject. Subject can never be 2 because if it is made 2 we have to objectify it which isn't possible. Anything that u can experience is an object.
"But ultimately enlightenment is for human beings" - well said. I think it's also for other sentient beings. But human body mind system is highest possible evolution. That's why enlightenment in other sentient beings are difficult but not impossible. Coming to your point, one thing you can focus for a while is - think, can there be two infinites? If you get the answer, you are ready for the next step. First focus in this query. Remember, infinite means it cannot be limited in any terms which is known or unknown or can be known. Hope this will help you as it also helped me at a certain time. Best wishes.
@@poushalimitra5730 I got your point earlier. That's why I asked you to focus on infinity. It's a step towards your actual query. Let me try again, "Number" you said is infinite. But how can number is infinite? Can number eat? Can number sleep? Can number talk? Can number be something else?... And so on. All the answers will be either "no" or "not possible". So number is not infinite. The sense number is infinite in mathematics is very limited and one dimensional in itself. Hope you will think on it and get back here... Best wishes.
List of questions with timestamps:
00:00 - Intro
01:51 - What separates the individual soul from Brahman?
08:53 - Can the self be self-aware without mind or object?
16:26 - You have said that maya projects the universe and veils the truth. Is this the same as the Samkhya philosophy?
25:50 - What is the closest concept in Vedanta to the ideas of the spirit and the soul?
39:39 - Is Advaita Vedanta escapism?
48:09 - Is Vedanta the same as subjective idealism?
55:15 - How can I be sure that consciousness is not manufactured by the brain?
Dear Vedanta New York,
Please start publishing Swami Sarvapriyananda talks as books, they are needed to many generations, many spiritual seekers around the world.🙏🙏🙏
Thank you Swamiji, and everyone who helps to produce and share these talks.
Thank You for the time stamps. Please also have Swami Ji's talk uploaded on Spotify
Hi pranam to Maharaj ji . I will be really grateful if Swamiji answers my questions:
what is the point of achieving career goals etc. Should I leave everything then ? Should I not strive to do better ? Also if I have limited free will, what is the point of trying , if I will always be limited ?
Yesssss, 33rd like lol
Thank you so much Swami jee. I never could have such clarity on Advaita but each time I listen to you it's more better. Heartfelt gratitude 🌷🙏🙏
This guy is really the equivalent of how R.C. Zaehner described Vivekanda, a teacher who breathed new life into a system of thought which in the hands of others can be quite austere and unappealing. I am not a nondualist. I am a thorough-going & proud "card carrying Dualist" of the Catholic neo-Thomist Variety, but I luv listening to this guy!!!!!
Holy Trinity is false doctrine, there is only God
Swami Sarvapriyananda is a blessed soul.. Forever indebted and grateful 🙏🙏🙏
Blessed Atman!
Answering to an invitation to America Ramana Maharshi is reported to have said that America is here only. And he wasn't joking. Now what does that mean? I like to know whether Swami is making a concession vis-à-vis the level of the questioner by giving such an answer or he thinks that that is the enlightened perspective of this (apparent? ) universe.
If Central Park exist when you are not aware of it, it means that space is real. The time that you will take to reach Central Park is real. If the concepts like outside, inside, here, there, now, then.. are all really real even after realization, how is going to bring about the fabled 'dhukkanivirthi and ananda prapti'?
Your position is very disheartening especially because you are not one of the best, but the best nondual teacher living today.
(If Swami doesn't answer, someone who is 'in the know'please answer. I am really confused )
हरी: ऊॅं तत्सत् 🙏🏻
श्रीरामकृष्णार्पणमस्तु 🙏🏻
Namaskar Swami Sarvapriyanandaji 🙏🏻
Out of the world swami ji
My fervent gratitude Swamiji. I have found answers to some issues i am presently facing.
Thank you for your intellect and clarity!
Swamiji your talks are awesome ,so convincing answers for logical minds. Koti Koti Pranam Swamiji 🙏
Your Spell Helps The Seeker To Merge Immediately In Self While Listening . Thanks.
Wonderful session.
Pranam swamiji.
Consciousnes is in another dimension
Very helpful. The answers in reference to the contents of scriptures were indeed illuminating as well as educative about the scriptures on the side.
Amazing,his experience.,his knowledge,his methodology and explanation....my pranam to you, Swamiji 🙏🙏🙏
He is so cute and humble 💕
If we have one small pond availability, no question of thirsting, lots of salutations
I love how swami will give a “straight answer”… listening to other holy men you rarely get this
I feel truly blessed by getting introduced to swami Sarvapriya Nanda by my ex boss who lives in the US. This was almost 2 months ago N now on every day i hear him for min one hour. I am literally addicted to his discourse. I am gradually becoming truly spiritual. I had so many questions about life which Swami ji has answered. He is so knowledgeable N ao unassuming. His language is immaculate N yet simple.
Amar pronam maharaj🙏🙏
If you listen closely to swamiji then all your questions vanish. Thank you Vedanta New York.
@Mike Sullivan the individual jiva only he has doubts and questions :)
Am
Thank you Vedanta New York for sharing this video 🙏🏻
41:10 Vedanta is not for wiping out your activity in the world; it makes you fearlessly limitless in the world itself.
Thanks for another set of Q&A, although more basic ones this time, with the exception of the last one 55:15. Regarding Vivekananda's criterions for discernment of Truth, isn't it obvious the whole society and culture imposes ignorance ie. non-Truth on all of us ? Isn't it actually its main purpose, keep people crippled, diminished , divided and deluded ? Already hijacked family members and friends, education system, media, politics - all involved ? I believe infants are free from ignorance. We do cast it on them later, mostly without being aware of that.
About last question: I wonder what happens with those persons that are back to life after brain/body died and state to be conscious of themselves being death and Dr., Family, nurses around speaking, crying around the death body but still they remain untouched as pure bliss consciousness ...some state they don't want to go back to body as they experience such a bliss .
Please provide swami sarvapriyananda lecutres in hindi also. So that Hindi knowing people can understand.
कृपया स्वामी सर्वप्रियानंद जी को कहें कि हिंदी में भी lectures दें ।
🙏
There is so many advaitha vedanta lectures are there in hindi in UA-cam.🙏
@@kannan9018 But I want lectures of swami sarvapriyananda jee
@@PRIYANSHU_NEGI_108 ok🙏
You can see Swami Anubhavananda ...
@@PRIYANSHU_NEGI_108 Learn English
Please take classes of Ajatavada philosophy at least 4-5 videos on topic on Ajatavada as early as possible
He does have classes on the Madukya karika on soundcloud. Just download soundcloud and listen.
If there is none or nothing other than Atma, how is Atmadnyan possible? Who will know whom?
I think athma Dhyan is to realise that I am athaman, nothing external. That vam asi.
Any restrictions to listen to !
Swamiji
How , why ,when did that indivisible atman or consciousness spurt into Jiva ?
What propelled creation?
Creation was propelled by 'desire'to become many. But brahman could not become as it was only the existence therefore it appeared as jivas just the real sun appears as many suns in buckets of water!!
Consciousness we are aware but matter we don’t know it appears like that even at the quantum level matter is not what it seems to be
Test of truth 44:05
On which email Id could I send my questions?
What I find very troubling about Advaita Vedanta is that I think it deals inadequately with the relation of the subject to the object. While it may be true to say that one is the subject and not what one experiences, that leaves out the reality of the pain involved. Saying one is not the body does absolutely nothing to resolve the problem of the body's ills. Put your hand in fire and tell me it is not your pain, even though you are not the pain but the one experiencing the pain. You can separate the subject from the object all day, but in real life pain hurts. Losing a bodily function, for instance, is not something one can isolate oneself from, even though theoretically one is the witness. Try witnessing your arm being torn off, for example; what use is this philosophy when it counts? It demands that we not be human, which is not an inconsiderable problem. It sounds great when you hear it, but when you finally realize what it takes to make it work, one realizes having no preferences is a tall, tall order, and without that, it's all talk and hopeful feelings and nothing more. This is my opinion, of course and perhaps of no value to anyone else.
very true . But that is applicable to all philosophy in general and not limited to only Advaita . Every philosophy , by definition , is just a search for truth, knowledge and shaping our worldviews thus . It helps us in solving day-to-day problems of attachment , emotions , depression, failure , etc . It may not necessarily deal with extreme situations such as torture or chronic pain . Their "target -audience" is the "normal man" .
Having said that , I do feel there are some hidden /subtle messages even for the "non-target audience" within certain philosophies .
For example , some Tibetan Buddhist practise Idealism(thinking of pain to be made up in mind and as ephemeral) to a very great level by voluntarily training under extreme situations of agony (mental and physical) . Similarly , I can think of many stories of Advaitins ,such as Sadashiva Brahmendra(who calmy walked away smiling , without the slightest sign of pain , even when his hand was chopped off by a Muslim ruler) , Shirdi Sai Baba (who cut himself and pulled out his intestines , again without any noticeable pain ) , Guru Tej Bahadur (who was tortured by the tyrant Aurangzeb , by boiling him alive ; he remained stoic as always ) , Mansur Hallaj ( brutally tortured for claiming An-al -Haq , yet his composure was unperturbed) .
Whether they actually felt the pain , yet faked their stoic-ness , or didnt feel the pain , or felt the pain and didnt care , we cannot say .
What we can say is , to put on that kind of stoicness , under such torturous situations is a Super-Oscar- winning-acting , or they naturally felt that stoicness owing to their height of the core of philosophies they subscribed to .
And even Science cannot help much with extreme chronic/acute pain . Situations are always not favorable./moral /legal to everyone . Society always puts people through such hells and we can say it is inevitable , even in modern tech-medical advanced society (such as evidences of torture in ISIS , war traumas , brutality and violence , chronic pain by newer and newer diseases ,psychological disorders like pureOCD , severe depression , psychosis , etc)
Buddha's words ring in my ears -"Life is suffering" . Happy Buddha Purnima !
What is the email id where we can send questions to Swami Sarvapriyananda ji? Please it would be of great help if someone replies.
It is also mentioned subtle and gross body can come only from tamas pradhana prakruthi is it that for the jiva to exhaust Sukha and Dhukha subtle body is req hence gross body 1st ch of PD
At Adyapeeth we see Lord Krishna and Mãã Radha at top followed by Mãã Kali and then the Guru . But I know Guru as Bramha, Vishnu and Maheswar ( Shiva), there is no existence without Guru then why he is at the bottom in the order of the Altar? Am a disciple of a pure bliss ( Paramhans), the saturated body.
Is tree and animal has pure consciousness?
How do i send my question?
@Ganesh MclHi, for those of us who have not been initiated by a guru, can they practice mantra meditation, if yes how can one choose the right mantra? And how to avoid changing the mantra now and then? I think when a guru gives you a mantra there's some power behind that, so you stick to it no matter what, but how to retain that same faith when we choose a mantra by ourselves?
ૐૐૐ
How can Brahman be the knower, when the Truth is that the Brahman is already THE All Knowing One/omniscient/Absolute Knowledge/Gnana/Knowledge itself....? what is it that the Brahman has to know (what is left for Brahman to know) by being the knower.. as its already the All knowing one..
hi i have a problem with the concept of absolute of nisargadatta maharaj. he and other spiritual speakers say that this absolute which they called parabrahman is beyond consciousness or prior to consciousness. So the i am is not perceieved and it seems to me like a state of uncosciousness where there is no awareness of the being (a sort of great void). can somebody clarify this to me cause it seems scary and confusing where after death the soul or god does not know its being
Nisargadatta Maharaj terminology can be confusing and there can be possible misinterpretation in translation. Ramana Maharshi's teaching is consistent and is in total agreement with Advaita Vedanta (AV). Self is not aware of itself as an object but is definitely Self aware, it is direct not like knowing an object. Do not go away with the understanding that Self is a zombie principle. Please refer to verse 12 & 33 of Bhagwan's Ulladu Narpadu. It will be clear.
@@arjunrathore8950 thank you so much. Yeah the teachings of Ramana are way better and clearer than nisargatta. Infact i had no problem with those i will stick to Ramana and advaita
@@omarrosario1811 My pleasure 🙏
@@arjunrathore8950 u remember we had a conversation a year ago.
Self is not aware of itself as an object but is definitely Self aware, it is direct not like knowing an object. //
i have found conflicting answers to this question in discourse of different saints. the question is in disembodied liberation when turiya alone remains , and three states are not there does it know itself(of course not as an object) or is self aware?
shankara in his long commentary on brahmavali(taiittriya bhasya)
No; for, the passage is intended to convey a definition of the Infinite.-The śruti quoted above, “where one sees nothing else......” is intended to define the nature of the Infinite (Bhūman’. Taking for granted the prevalent notion that “what one sees is something else, (something other than one’s own self), the śruti here gives us to know the nature of the Infinite in the words “where there is no seeing of something else, that is the Infinite.” Since the words “something else” are used in the śruti where it seeks to deny what we prima facie understand by seeing etc.,[6] the passage cannot convey the idea that one can act upon (i. e., know) one’s own Self. Owing to the absence of duality in one’s own Self, there can be no knowing of one’s own Self. If the Self were the thing known, there would be no knower, inasmuch as the Self is concerned in the act only as the thing known. It cannot be contended that the one Self alone is concerned in both ways, both as the knower and as the known; for, as devoid of parts, the one Self cannot be both the knower and the known simultaneously. Being indivisible, the Self cannot, indeed, be the known and the knower, at the same time.
similary in kena bhasya(verse 12)
Hence the meaning of the expression ‘Pratibodhaviditam matam’ is just what we explained it to be. Some, however, explain that the drift of this portion of the text is that the Atman is knowable by itself. There the Atman is thought of as conditioned and people talk of knowing the Atman by the Atman, distinguishing as it were, the unconditioned Atman from the Atman conditioned by intelligence, etc. Thus it has been said “He sees the Atman by the Atman” and “O Best of men! know the Atman by the Atman, thyself.” It is clear that the unconditioned Atman, being one, is not capable of being known either by itself or by others. Being itself the knowing principle, it cannot stand in need of another knowing principle; just as one light cannot possibly require another light.
is shankracharya intent is to knock out any possibility of self-awareness (not only .not as an object which is obvious, but other mysterious means where it is not an object) in 'DEFINITION' or principle in any case?
or he charged against it as in the general parlance, awareness requires the presence of triads, and he is keen to preserve the turiya or brahman in parMartha from the influx of triads.
it can still lead to alternate possibility that it can know itself/self-aware, yet polluting triads don't appear, strangely, divinely and is incomprehensible to human minds?
@@Mo1hit thanks for your comment. I was just thinking of you the other day with regards to our discussion on Ajatavada. I have now come to realize that there was a serious flaw in my understanding during our last conversation. I will get into that later.
But let’s take the question of Self Awareness first. I have spent lot of time on this and verified from 3 experts and also there is backing from sruti ( sruti backing is a must). I have run this by David Godman, Michael James and I have found the answers in Swami Parmarthananda lectures on Madukya Karika and BS (unfortunately I do not have his email address otherwise I would have stalked him :)) and also have a sruti reference. I can send you verbatim what they have told me if you connect with me on email (rathore.arjun at gmail dot com). Here is the answer.
There is no knower in Self, that is 100% correct. As soon as we add “er” (e.g knower) or in sanskrit “ta” (e.g. gyata) we are talking about action and also duality. There is no action in Self. Does that mean Self is a zombie? Absolutely no. A robot is like a zombie, has so clue about its existence, totally unaware, inert. So after the knowledge of Brahman will I be a zombie? That does not make sense. If that were so I would prefer to be ignorant. Sat and Chit are always together. Consciousness without existence is meaningless and Existence without consciousness is meaningless. So if you find in any text that says Self does not know itself, it implies does not know itself as an object, because as I mentioned there is duality and action in knower. Everything unreal has real as its basis. When we have this experience of the world not all of it is unreal. The reality is mixed in there. “I AM” ( Sat Chit) is misunderstood, due to maya/ignorance there is superimposition and our experience is I AM this or I AM that. Ego appropriates “I AM” and causes all the trouble. You must be already knowing that, Swami Sarvapriyananda also talks a lot about it, this “I AM” is available effortlessly to us all the time, specially evident in our waking state. As soon as you think about it, start thinking about “your existence” then intellect gets involved. I am not talking about that, I am talking about effortless awareness. When you are highly focused on something, immersed in some exceptional work that you lose yourself in it, even then there is this general sense of self existence, not deliberate. To know others (prameya) you employ the sense (pramana), the whole triputi/triad is involved. In “I AM” there is no prameya or pramana. Triputi rises together, if there is no pramana and prameya, then what good is the pramata. The Self gives itself away in “I AM”. This is Self awareness. Jnani always abides in “I AM”, for ignorant folks like me it is all mixed up (I AM this & that).
In fact the only thing Self knows is itself ( I am using “know” loosely). What about all this experience? We will get to that. I recently resolved my misunderstanding on this. Let’s take that next and we will end with sruti.
I had this misunderstanding that somehow this experience is presented to the Self. I was so so wrong. I did have some doubts on this and hence I was pursuing this for clarification. Now I have the right understanding. Experience does not touch the Self. Nothing touches Self. It is asangaha, that is why Ajatavada is the ultimate truth. When I say, I am having an experience, is the statement correct? Yes and No. Depends on what you mean by I? If you take yourself as a “knower” then yes you are having the experience, if you take yourself as turiyam/Self then, no you are not having the experience. Self enables the experience but does not participate in the experience. It just illumines the knower and the known. The standard example which Advaita Vedanta (AV) uses is of a Sun shining on buckets filled with water. Each bucket has a reflection of Sun. That reflection is effected by the quality of the water. Now tell me, does the Sun have anything to do with the reflection? Is it attached to that reflection? No. Similarly reflected consciousness is not same as pure consciousness in that it is diluted by the reflecting medium. Only when the mind is 100% purified then the reflected consciousness can be said to be same as the pure consciousness. Experience begins and ends with the knower. There is no experience in the Self. Self is not the experiencer. Then what is Self? Self is sakshi, the “silent” witness. Pay attention to “silent” and there is no “er” in witness. Swami Sarvapriyananda always says that AV is taking your from known to unknown, step by step. The prakarana granthas the introductory texts will talk about the observer and the observed. It is taking you first to the knower, if it straightaway took you to sakshi you will not get it. Even in prakarna grantha also they will clarify that knower is not the ultimate. Somehow this confusion is there the Self is the observer, I also was having some of that confusion. I see this confusion in more than 99% of the folks in these AV facebook groups I am in. But the fact is, I have nothing to do with the knower, I just illumine it. I have nothing to do with this experience, it is the knowers problem. Nothing touches me. I AM. So the trick is not to watch the ego, there is no watching in “I AM”. One just has to just “be”. That’s it.
Now let’s come to sruti. The seventh mantra of Mandukya is highly potent. It has all the answers. You will get the clarity if you listen to Swami Parmarthananda’s 9th and 10th lecture of chapter 1 of Mandukya Karika(it is available in archive.org). He is simply brilliant.
नान्तःप्रज्ञं न बहिःप्रज्ञं नोभयतःप्रज्ञं न प्रज्ञानघनं न प्रज्ञं नाप्रज्ञम् |
अदृश्यमव्यवहार्यमग्राह्यमलक्षणमचिन्त्यमव्यपदेश्यमेकात्मप्रत्ययसारं प्रपञ्चोपशमं शान्तं शिवमद्वैतं चतुर्थं मन्यन्ते स आत्मा स विज्ञेयः || 7 ||
The first part of the mantra ( नान्तःप्रज्ञं न बहिःप्रज्ञं नोभयतःप्रज्ञं न प्रज्ञानघनं न प्रज्ञं नाप्रज्ञम् ) it is telling Turiyam is not the knower of 3 states ( it is not the waker, not the dreamer, nor the sleeper, nor some intermediary state, nor the Lord the knower of all). Then is it inert? No it is not inert.
The second part of the mantra ( अदृश्यमव्यवहार्यमग्राह्यमलक्षणमचिन्त्यमव्यपदेश्यमे) it is telling Turiyam is not the 3 prameyas ( waker’s world, dreamer’s world, sleeper’s world).
Then what it is?
The third part of the mantra ( कात्मप्रत्ययसारं प्रपञ्चोपशमं शान्तं शिवमद्वैतं चतुर्थं मन्यन्ते स आत्मा स विज्ञेयः ) is telling even though it is different from 3 knowers and 3 known it “illumines” all of them. Ekamapratyasaram is a crucial world. It is that which is common in the three states, I AM.
When we are extroverted, looking outwards as a knower then all this is experienced. Trick is to turn back (introverted) and be the illuminator of the knower.
7:50 So it cannot be said either dualistic or non-dualistic is the truth. There is nothing like one truth. The goal is to get a blissed state.
E = M*Consciousness "2
mind blowing....straight from brahman😊😊
38:01 can't argue with nondualists ....
Being a Non dualistic , I often have arguments with ISKCON followers who consider non dualistic as mayawadis.
@@ajaydalaya2195 no need to ... everyone has opinions ... let the Lord handle ...
Poor scientists, wasting their lives trying to stuff consciousness into their materialist model of reality. It is a naive pursuit that is doomed to fail.
ഉള്ളതിനെ ഉള്ളവണ്ണം അറിഞ്ഞാൽ പിന്നെ അഹവും പ്രപഞ്ചവും ഇല്ല. ഉള്ളതേ ഉള്ളൂ. ഉള്ളതൊരിക്കലും ഇല്ലാതാകുന്നില്ല. ഇല്ലാത്തതൊരിക്കലും ഉണ്ടാകുന്നില്ല.
As a Jiva, am not conscious of my neighbor.. am only conscious of my body/mind.. So is this not individual consciousness? Unlike Brhaman who is conscious of all the Jivas and in fact everything/ALL that exists.. so our individual consciousness of the Jiva is limited to our body/mind.. unlike the universal Consciousness... This is the case in the manifested state...as it exists today... And it will remain so eternally (Jiva continues to remain distinct even upon Mukthi), as the Jivas are eternal parts of the whole...Universal Conciousness is infinite.. that does not rule out the existence of the individual consciousness... as there can be no limit to the amount of light present (even in a small room)...for example.. we can keep on adding (in fact manifesting from the whole) more and more light (parts) which in no way can cause the infinite light to run out of space etc...This is the case even with Light in a small room.. then one can imagine the inconceivable mighty Lord.. though he is infinite consciousness, that in no way rules out the existence of individual consciousness (Jiva) which is the case today... and will eternally remain so (even upon the Jiva attaining Moksha)...And in fact in the case of light.. there can be two (infact as many) infinites existing simultaneously even in a small room... (same with consciousness.. (part and the whole)) though logically it is not conceivable by the mind... but such is the inconceivable nature of the LORD...So many infinites (Light or Consciousness) remaining as part and whole, eternally existing together....same with Bliss/Gnana... and existence.. etc...
👃👃
How do we know we aren't just robots and the personality comes from just the brain. And when the battery runs,out we die.
Robots are not conscious. There is no first person subjective experience 'I am experiencing' in robots.
@@prashanthp2857 the reason i ask is because so far he and you all have answered many questions i had in my mind. ☺
@@prashanthp2857 good answer.
@@prashanthp2857 this also explain out of body experience
@@prashanthp2857 but how can we be sure robot doesnt feel it.. Just wondering.
SANATHANI 'S QUESTION ?
100,00,000 rupees OFFER QUESTION YOU SHOULD INCLUDE IN YOUR DEBATE ALWAYS.
ALLAH CREATED THAT AND THIS,
JESUS CREATED THAT AND THAT
WHAT IS THE SPECIAL THING THAT ALLAH OR JESUS CREATED SPECIALLY FOR THE MUSLIMS OR CHRISTIANS WHICH IS NOT CREATED FOR OTHERS.
TELL ME AT LEAST ONE THING IN THE ENTIRE WORLD OR UNIVERSE?
IF ANY ONE SHOWS atleast onething SANATHANI IS READY TO GO INTO THEIR RELIGION
Firstly, my sincere gratitude from a fellow Calcuttan to the swami for opening up a whole new world of Vedantan spiritual science n philosophy. Secondly, just to clarify the concept of the term 'spirit', etymologically it is from the Latin word 'spiritus' or the verb ' 'spirare' meaning to breathe. This was borrowed from the Greek word 'pneuma' as you rightly pointed out, meaning the same thing. In fact the words inspire n expire simply mean, in breathing/inhalation, out breathing/exhalation and respiration is repeat process. When the body dies, we say expire, the final breath, or the pranic life force has left. Just thought I'd share that.
✌👉😎. T.
I love how he listens to and respects the questions.
Are you belief in shruti.
Lord Shiva in disguise. 🙏💐
Hi Swami Sarvapriyananda,
Could you please let me know how someone like me can ask you a question online?
I've watched your Drg Drsya Viveka, Aparokshanubhuti, a little of Mandukya Upanishad, few videos of yours delivered at IIT Kanpur, and right now am listening to ur Bhagavadgita talks on youtube.
But I didn't understand how can I ask you a question! During this pandemic I understand that the BG talks are happening online (zoom?). So, everyone is asking you questions online. So, I thought it will be nice if me too gets the opportunity.
Please respond
if u figure it out do reply.
If you search early ask swami episodes the address is on some of them in the drop down box at the top of the video. Sorry I can't recall it.
@@dorothywarren1441 do u mean there is a drop down box in a video frame and address is written on that?
or, do u mean in the youtube video description section of some of those videos?
Revered SIR I profusely thank you for all your efforts and I have become ur greatest lover. By You I mean not ur body or mind but u the Consciousness. What u painstakingly acquired over so many years, you have given us in a matter of few hours. May God grant u whatsoever ur heart desires. Koti koti pranaam.
Brilliant talk 🕉
Great Being 🙏🏻
Ohm Shanti Swami,
Does tatvas (elements) have consciousness awareness within themselves ?
Can you please help me understand the relation between tatvas and bhraman ? 🙏🏼
How can one dislike such things yaar!! 😟
Accept and smile.
@@WoSarvatraHain hnji
Gaudiya vaishnava tradition rejects Advaita view.
I always have debates with iskcon people.
@@ajaydalaya2195 ohh thts y
Swami talks about the subjective idealism of the Vijñānavāda school of Buddhism (also called Yogacara), but I want to point out that subjective idealism does not describe the entirety of this school! One part of it certainly is subjective idealism, but there’s another part that is definitely not to be reduced to it. If you’re interested in this topic, I recommend the series of lectures of Dr. Jay Garfield at Sravasti Abbey called “Emptiness and the Mind Perceiving It”. (By the way, Swami has studied with Dr. Garfield at Harvard)
Thank you for the pointer to Prof. Garfield’s lecture series. Really cool stuff! Just watched the first lecture and, as a Vedantin, I could not agree more with the following observation by the professor “Doxography is a really valuable thing but doxography can be dangerous because doxographic treatises are always written from a particular standpoint and always from the standpoint of whoever takes themselves to be at the top of that particular hierarchy. Although people tend to be very careful and charitable about painting their own position, they tend either to be not as careful or as charitable as one might like in characterizing the positions of their opponents. They can set them up as strawmen for refutation.” While Prof. Garfield was speaking of doxography with reference to Buddhist schools such as Yogacara and Madhyamaka, I think this observation applies equally to Vedanta vis-à-vis Buddhism as well as it pertains to doxography from both these traditions in characterizing each other.
@@rsr9200 That's exactly what I had in mind! In his series of lectures, he has to come back to this point very very often. If we set aside for a moment our preconceptions about a certain tradition (that we've heard from its opponents!) and listen to it directly, we can definitely learn something and benefit from it. By the way, I think Yogacara has astonishing similarities with Advaita Vedanta. Understanding one helps a lot in understanding the other.
@@arielpalmer Finally finished watching the entire 15-part lecture series spanning nearly 30 hours. Thankful for the opportunity to learn a little bit about the relationship between the Yogacara and Madhyamaka schools of Buddhism from Prof Garfield, a truly gifted teacher endowed with a rare combination of erudition and eloquence. These lectures not only deepened my admiration for these Buddhist schools of thought but also reinforced my conviction that Advaita Vedanta offered the best path for my spiritual growth through its elegant formulation of non-dual reality and its accommodation of a God-centered spiritual practice. My only disappointment with Prof Garfield’s narrative in these lectures was his reliance on a hackneyed caricature of Vedanta which seems prevalent in Buddhist doxography. After hearing his warning about the dangers of doxography in his first lecture, I was hoping that he would give Vedanta a fair shake but sadly that was not to be. Nonetheless, I would highly recommend this lecture series to Vedantins interested in a nuanced view of Yogacara.
🙏🕉 thank you
It's strange that I come across comments from people I have seen overtime. Not that I know a thing about then it has become like a family. People across the globe watches swami who breaks the internet everytime. Cheers to people in here. And ofcourse can't help admiring vedanta and his explanation.
It's weird though. Seems that no matter what topic my question of the day seems to be I can watch nearly ANY lecture by Swamiji and a solution to it will appear either directly from his lips or in my mind. It's like he aligns my mind to the right something and my mind works better while I am listening to him. That has happened to me so many times that it cannot be coincidence.
@@coolmesser I can relate. He makes an excellent teacher.
स्वामी जी प्रणाम 🙏🙏
आपका हिंदी में बोलना बहुत अच्छा लगता है 👍👍❤️❤️❤️
I do remember Dave Chalmers (the person Swami mentioned) telling me once (about 30 years ago when we were grad students at Indiana U, Bloomington) that the reason he decided to not become a mathematician is that he was convinced that even pure mathematics and theoretical physics would never be able to answer the real big questions. So he turned to cognitive science. Unfortunately this is still limited since it is within a material framework. Brahman can never be completely "understood" in such a framework since Brahman is devoid of all properties/qualities.
Vijay Krish. Your comment is really interesting. Have just listened to Dave chalmers and thought the same as you. Have you heard of Bernardo kalstrup? He is while not being a follower of Vedanta, a non dualist and non materialist. Kalstrup has doctorates in computer science and philosophy. His thinking is quite close to that of Swami Ji. I think the answer to the nature of conscious will ultimately come from a non dualist non materialist view....I,e, the vedantist view. Western materialist view on consciousness does not seem to be cutting it.
@Girl Sage try reading the New Testament and Bible generally, from a vedantist non dualistic perspective. Jesus Christ ... the kingdom of god is within you. Psalm 82 v 6 You are. Gods . In other words you are Brahman. Also John 10 v 34. Have I not said ye are all Gods? I.e. all part of Brahman. Jesus was essentially a non dualist .... the Father and I are one. He as an incarnated man is one with God or Brahman.
@Girl Sage Jesus also promises eternal punishment for finite sins. Seems he. Lost his temper quite a bit. Cursing the fig tree for not bearing fruit...out of season. Using a whip to clear the temple. Anyways you are entitled to ure opinion and belief. Have a peaceful and joyous life. ☺️
@Girl Sage 🤣I hope not.critical thinking should be welcome. Sorry I did not get your other replies.
What were you guys studying during grad school?
Thank you swamiji and the whole team
It seems magical this play of consciousness which seems to spew out the world and its objects then merge it back into itself. the world seems like a mirage. Thank you swamiji once again. (The prince of kashi story I like to hear again and again)
Perfect.. The Jiva and the Prakriti are part of Brahman... Both Jiva and the material nature are ultimately made of the same material ( or an element or Spiritual element, if i may say so, to denote what they both are made of).. as what Brahman is made of which can be called as Consciousness (as well as Knowledge/Bliss)..(Sat Chit Ananda being the very essence of the Atman and these three being inseparable and intrinsic nature of the Atman) and To the Jivas, the nature may appear as insentient... But in reality, it is the very essence of Brahman or Consciousness that appears or is projected/is manifested as Jiva and Prakriti.. but then the important thing to note is that though they are made of the same essence of Brahman/Consciousness (Aham Brahmasmi - The Jiva is of the same essence as Brahman in every respect/ He is the same as Brahman in Quality but not in quantity.. so he remains as eternal part of the whole... ), they remain as part of the whole eternally... and so the Jiva is an eternal experiencer .. (Vishishtadvaita) as far as i could see... As the Upanishads reveal/declare that The Brahman manifests this universe and the Jivas, out of HIMSELF.. The material out of which they are made of being HIMSELF.. He being the Nimitta kāraṇa and Upādāna kāraṇa and ..the third Karana as well).... And the beauty here is that though we are made of the very essense of Brahman (Aham Brahmasmi), we as individual Jivas do have freedom (though limited, as Freedom as well is the quality of Brhaman) and he remains to be a part eternally.. Brahman is such inconceivable in that his manifestation is such that the though Jiva is a part of himself,/Brahman, Jiva as an experiencer is very individualistic/independent entity (though he is a part of the whole), in the sense that though the very experience is Brahman (or that though the Brahman precisely measures and offers the very experience to the Jiva), The Brahman is NOT the EXPERIENCER here.. he remains eternally ALOOF of the Jivas experience... that is to say that the Brahman is never the experiencer.. but the Jiva is.. thats how inconceivable the Bhraman IS... And also the experience in our dreams are VERY REAL.. in spite of this experience coming from a Dream to the Jivas.. So though its only a dream, there IS experience to the Jiva from the Dreams .. Some of the Karma are supposed to be experienced through dreams as well, alongside Real daylight (non-dream) experiences... and the non-conscious sleep as well brings experiences to the Jiva... and that is part of ones Karma as well.. How well we sleep and experience sleep/dreams/waking states, are all part of Karma.. The COSMIC Design is such inconceivable!!! SO the Brahman is not the experiencer and this experience of Karma is not for Brahman.. Rather this experience of Karma is precisely measured and offered and delivered to the Jiva BY the Brahman.. So this experience of Karma is for the Jiva as Jiva is the experiencer!!
@ 39:20 is an important question and it has been answered very briefly.. it requires it's own seperate session
Swami please speak on Adyatma yoga told by Lord Yama to Nachiketha
I love your talks and have great respect for your Tradition and Teachers - your Vedanta in 5 parables is wonderful 🙏 . I was interested in the discussion at the end of this presentation about the differences between idealists and realists . What is your interpretation of Sri Ramana"s Maharshi's words on these matters ? Thank you 🙏🕉️
Swami how can I join your sessions - I have been listening to the UA-cam presentations-Also I would really appreciate if I can get a PDF of Vedanta Sara which you distributed to the students - I eager to learn -I bought the text , however it does not have the Sanskrit script
Swamy ji, I've one question. When the body departs(Sukshma sharisar) does jeeva Aatma too goes with sukshma sharira? I know jeeva Aatma is nothing but Brahman...but why there is dual here? 🙏🙏🙏
Mind blowing.Arguments are placed with
conviction.
I am the Dreamer, ever shining Subject, thank you Swami, you are jagatguru, World Teacher via UA-cam, never stop Oh Kind Oneness🙏🏾🙏🏾🙏🏾
About the Self awareness is not how it works.
Brahman or the Self is aware of its own being simply by being itself.
brahman is aware of its itself, it does not need the mind or the body.
Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 1.4.10
Brahman was indeed all this in the beginning.
Hence it only knew itself,as I am Brahaman.
Pranams to Swamiji, i have a question here.What is the difference between Vivarthavada of Shankara and Ajatavada of Sri Goudapada?
Answering to an invitation to America, Ramana Maharshi was reported to have said that 'America is here only'. And He wasn't joking. Now what implication can one take from that statement about the idea of space for a jnani?
I very much like to know whether Swami is making a concession vis-à-vis the level of understanding of the questioner by giving such an answer or Swami consideres that is the enlightened perspective of a jnani of this (apparent? ) universe.
If Central Park 'exists'(language !) when it is not there in your field of awareness, it means that Space is real. If you go further by the same thread, the time you take to reach Central Park is also real. If concepts like inside-outside, here- there, now-then are all real even after Self-realization, l don't understand how is this so-called realization is going to bring about the fabled 'dhukka nivirthi, and ananda prapthi'. How is it going to make my problems 'unreal'?
I have a great love(yes that is the word!) for Swami Sarvapriyananda and l consider him one of the best (at par with Sri Nochur Vengatramam in depth) nondual teachers around. So this is exceptionally disheartening...
On a lighter vein, l think it is his association with Mr. Rich Archer and Mr. Rick's 'not no hold barred' nondualitstic positions which are influencing him. (Bad company !)
If Swami doesn't feel like answering and someone 'in the know' of this nondual realms feels like answering, please do so. I really need one. This razor edge walking...
"Awareness" and "field of awareness" are not the same. The teaching is that Central Park or any other place in the Universe cannot exist without Awareness, just like the pot cannot exist without the clay.
This video is a veritable goldmine of Vedantic knowledge. My humble pranams!
I wonder what he thinks of working with entities such as Choronzon enochian demon abyss keeper ,as Crowley said the last obstacle to divine union.
And can one even function in material reality without an ego,in samadhis states yes but to function i doubt it. Many spiritual people pretend not to have it only for it to a more subtle form of a spiritual identity, the problem is when ego is ruling over awareness .
1:06:02 every experience is consciousness shining upon an object
Just an observation the more you concentrate on individual mind wants and desires and the worldly things the more far away the self/Brahman seems to be and vice versa. The tricks mind plays. Blessed are great souls who have done years of meditation. Thank you swamiji for sharing your knowledge
About the brain and consciousness, Aldous Huxley- I believe it was he- suggested that perhaps the brain was “ a reduction valve “ to mitigate the enormous power of universal consciousness and its effect on the human consciousness. See his essay The Doors of perception
How do we submit a question? And also how can we sign up to his study groups? Thank you
The best in the world. And a tremendous blessing!
A very informative session Guruji 👍🙏
Maharaj ami New York toh jete parbo na...but thakur jodi chaan apnar sathe belur math a dekha hote pare...ami thakur ar kache amar ichhe ta janalam....
Thank you Swami.
As a Jiva, am not conscious of my neighbor.. am only conscious of my body/mind.. So is this not individual consciousness? Unlike Brhaman who is conscious of all the Jivas and in fact everything/ALL that exists.. so our individual consciousness of the Jiva is limited to our body/mind.. unlike the universal Consciousness... This is the case in the manifested state...as it exists today... And it will remain so eternally (Jiva continues to remain distinct even upon Mukthi), as the Jivas are eternal parts of the whole...Universal Conciousness is infinite.. that does not rule out the existence of the individual consciousness... as there can be no limit to the amount of light present (even in a small room)...for example.. we can keep on adding (in fact manifesting from the whole) more and more light (parts) which in no way can cause the infinite light to run out of space etc...This is the case even with Light in a small room.. then one can imagine the inconceivable mighty Lord.. though he is infinite consciousness, that in no way rules out the existence of individual consciousness (Jiva) which is the case today... and will eternally remain so (even upon the Jiva attaining Moksha)...And in fact in the case of light.. there can be two (infact as many) infinites existing simultaneously even in a small room... (same with consciousness.. (part and the whole)) though logically it is not conceivable by the mind... but such is the inconceivable nature of the LORD...
It's not that complicated, just because you exist as an enlightened being doesn't mean that you don't understand that transactional reality exist and the subtle body moves from physical body to physical body and so in that sense there definitely IS such a thing as reincarnation.
What is the different between Telepathy and hypnotism..... In a spiritual life if someone wish to realise how to connect with a person by Telepathy, is it possible?
Agra paschayat,google KO mai kundali sikha sakta hoon .
Phek KE to dekho. Sanatani ,hindu zora,ehudi,christ,islam tao huku,con e fucious,lhama ,SIKH,budda jain .
Pata nahi to ITNA pata to pata HAI humara thikana gulabi NAGAR hai.
Bolo mayajal,the internet!
Jai Sri Ramakrishna Jai Sri Ramakrishna Jai Sri Ramakrishna Jai Sri Ramakrishna Jai Sri Ramakrishna
What an explanation about reincarnation 🙏🙏🙏thank you Swamiji
Swamiji would like to meet you personally to have your blessings 🙏
Jai Sri Ramakrishna 🙏🌺
1;04:52 what does this "matter" even mean now?
1:05:15 mind and brain mapping
Me encanta ( literal ) .
How to ask question?
57 brain
❤❤❤🙏🙏🙏
There was a doubt about soul and brahman, it got cleared. 😊But one thing is, when an individual person discerns b/w the subject and object , why it is not that the other persons are also subject? Though physical appearance is considered to be maya, even the body of investigators' too. But ultimately enlightenment is for for human being, not for the objects. So why not every other human is also subject for every other individual from very beginning of investigation ? And is the projecting
"Power" of maya also brahman?
Subject is the one who experiences. When you look around. It's you who is experiencing the world outside. Hence there is only one subject. Subject can never be 2 because if it is made 2 we have to objectify it which isn't possible.
Anything that u can experience is an object.
The "object" is the human body only, not "Awareness", which can never be an "object".
"But ultimately enlightenment is for human beings" - well said. I think it's also for other sentient beings. But human body mind system is highest possible evolution. That's why enlightenment in other sentient beings are difficult but not impossible. Coming to your point, one thing you can focus for a while is - think, can there be two infinites? If you get the answer, you are ready for the next step. First focus in this query. Remember, infinite means it cannot be limited in any terms which is known or unknown or can be known. Hope this will help you as it also helped me at a certain time. Best wishes.
@@poushalimitra5730 I got your point earlier. That's why I asked you to focus on infinity. It's a step towards your actual query. Let me try again,
"Number" you said is infinite. But how can number is infinite? Can number eat? Can number sleep? Can number talk? Can number be something else?... And so on. All the answers will be either "no" or "not possible". So number is not infinite. The sense number is infinite in mathematics is very limited and one dimensional in itself.
Hope you will think on it and get back here... Best wishes.