00:06 Advaita Vedanta emphasizes the understanding of limitless being and consciousness. 03:16 The relationship between Consciousness and the experienced 06:02 Consciousness in Advaita Vedanta and Madhyamaka perspectives 09:12 Consciousness is the only reality and everything appears as a modification of Consciousness. 12:23 Consciousness may only arise in complex systems 15:37 Engaging with science in spiritual pursuits is beneficial 18:37 Faith in Advaita Vedanta is based on inquiry and observation, not blind belief. 21:32 Cultivating non-duality and the stages of thought liberation 24:37 Jivan Mukti - living Liberation in Advaita Vedanta 27:38 Three components of full Liberation in Advaita Vedanta 30:25 Discussion on spiritual teachings and book recommendations. pin

Finally hearing two great minds in laying the foundation of The Ultimate Truth gave me immense joy. OM Shanti 🙏🙏🙏

I never expected that Sam Harris would agree to have a conversation with Swamy Sarvapriyananda but it has happened, that is beyond belief. Just like Sam Harris, I am also an agnostic. I enjoyed this conversation. Advaita Philosophy is very intellectual and fascinating.

Incredible meeting.....of incredible minds of two gentlemen. Om Shanti!

Very Heart warming. Sam really brought out the best in a very kind and beautiful teacher. Peace and love.🙏

Grateful YOU are here. Bless you all. Big hug.

In speaking of *Sat-Chit-Ananda,* the threefold nature of Reality, Sarvapriyananda gives a good explanation of *Sat* ("Being") . . . and *Chit* ("Consciousness") . . . but seems to downplay *Ananda* as mere "pleasures". In fact, *Ananda* is really at the same universal level as *Sat* and *Chit.* It is the nature of Reality as pervasive *Goodness* or *Divine Love* . . .

This is real talk.

Amazing dialogue. Loved it, enjoyed it thoroughly.

Namaskar Swami Sarvapriyanandaji Maharaj🙏🏻 & Sam Harris 🙏🏻

I am so happy to finally see Sam Harris and Swamiji in a conversation!

Fantastic discussion. Definitely Have pondered these subjects .

Thank you so much for this 🙏 ❤ One of the best discussions I've ever heard 🙏🙏🙏🙏

Thank your sir.

Thanks for this

Sam is right that the we cannot scientifically evaluate a subjective state and that everyone can only describe his/her first person experience . However, he misses the point that the process of spiritual growth is about sublimation to a no-mind state, a state beyond the first person experience itself .

Wonderful to hear both of them.. And this clip needs more than million views but stands at 23k 😢

Advaita is exactly like Buddhism. Swami Ji’s explanation of full and complete liberation is exactly the same as the Buddha’s Sila (morality/purification of mind), samadhi (meditation), and panya (wisdom/discernment of ultimate reality).

❤

🙏💌

“When conceptual thinking occurs while resting in meditation, whatever arises does so out of your own mind. Since mind does not consist of any concrete essence whatsoever, thinking is itself empty of any real entity. Like the analogy of a cloud that appears within space and vanishes again into space, thinking occurs within mind and dissolves again into mind. In nature, conceptual thinking is the innate dharmata. “‘Crossing the dangerous defile’ means that when mind moves into a variety of thoughts, you should direct your attention into this mind itself. Like a thief entering an empty house, empty thoughts cannot in any way harm an empty mind. That is called having ‘crossed the dangerous defile of moving thoughts.’ The king asked the master: How does one “gain the unchanging confidence of fruition”? The master replied: Listen to this, Your Majesty! The awakened mind of bodhicitta is not created through causes nor destroyed through circumstances. It is not made by ingenious buddhas nor manufactured by clever sentient beings. It is originally present in you as your natural possession. When you recognize it through your master’s oral instructions, since mind is the forefather of the buddhas, it is like the analogy of recognizing someone you already know.” From “Advice From the Lotus Born,” by Padmasambhava

Consiouness is a subject and Science is object based.

Please upload the whole interview!!!!! 😭😭😭😭

This exchange is only a first step. The two are NOT in agreement since Sam is still hung up on the neurophysiology model: That Consciousness arises from brains. He doesn't quite get the point of Advaita Vedanta. To use a Zen saying: "A dirt clod is the Buddha" This means that a dirt clod and the Buddha are both Pure Consciousness ("In-Itself"), but the Buddha is more advanced in the subset of consciousness "of" things, the physiology to experience this awareness, and the knowledge and interpretation of the experience. But again, everything in the universe IS Pure Consciousness, whether it's a rock or a Saint, or the Creator. The whole universe as one living organism as the "One" (from Plotinus), pure Substance of Consciousness, or Brahman.

Is there such thing as ‘the one’ ? My heart says there is only one person for me, and not to even try to love another.. my seeking to higher truth gives me a feeling that it’s not the case, it is currently a conflict within

🥰💙🌊🕯 🙏🏻

Harris is inching ever so closer to intention. Something might be an appearance, a modification of itself that has no independent reality, but this does not mean the appearance has no purpose or meaning.

Is it the whole video or a part of it ?

Have yo got the Donald Hoffman and Swami Sarvapriyananda talk.

o basically, Harris is implying the "Small I" doesn't necessarily merge with a "Big I", when one masters the meditative technique to establish oneself in "witness consciousness". Its more of a "blissfull nothingness". Swamiji's school believes the end goal is Small I & Big I merging as an end result of the meditative technique. Its still impossible to scientifically prove which one is correct, or if even both are. Both Sam's perspective and Swamiji;s perspective is experiential in nature. The way of reaching the meditative state may be methodical (similar to scientific a method), however science and rationality still cannot explain the phenomena of consciousness. This subject is under the purview of "purpose", while the "standard model of science & evolution" falls in the category of "function".

this is only a small portion of the full talk

Consciousness and its objects arise dependent, each on the other. How is it possible to speak about Consciousness with no objects? How can there be seeing absent an object seen?

Sam is like most Westerners, myself included, wedded to misery and rumination 😂 Mind you, Europe, and America in particular, encourages it with their 'Death of God' and the love of trinkets 😂 Love these two lads ❤

Love Sam Harris ❤️ he's on a genuine quest for Enlightenment. I miss Christopher Hitchens 😢 would have loved to hear his view on vedanta, although he didn't study Eastern philosophy. Can imagine what he would have said ....

Where did Conscious begin?

Blind leading the blind. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

Wish both of them would learn to edit their thought, they both go on and on . Simple short concise speaking would be so appreciated. They are both brilliant and so in their heads

Is this real talk

There is no end to the path because there is no path and there never was.

Notes: _Buddhism:_ - Emphasizes the impermanence and unsatisfactoriness of all conditioned phenomena, including the self. - Teaches that suffering arises from craving and attachment. - Proposes that liberation is possible through the Eightfold Path, which includes ethical conduct, meditation, and wisdom. - Emphasizes the practice of mindfulness as a means to see reality as it is. _Advaita Vedanta:_ - Asserts that pure consciousness or Brahman is the fundamental reality and that the individual self (atman) is identical to Brahman. - Teaches that ignorance of this identity is the cause of suffering and that realization of this identity brings liberation. - Proposes that liberation is possible through the practice of self-inquiry (Atma-vichara) and meditation. - Emphasizes the importance of a qualified teacher (Guru) to guide the aspirant in the practice. _Take Away:_ - Many people have glimpses of the true nature of reality, but may not be able to fully live it or embody it. - Full liberation requires not just realization of the truth through herbs or mystical experience, but also purification of the mind and advanced training in meditation. - Becoming a guru or teacher prematurely can be harmful to oneself and others if the necessary groundwork has not been done. - Strict moral conduct and deepening one's meditation practice are important for staying in touch with the truth and embodying it in daily life. - The goal of liberation is not a final state or accomplishment, but rather a perpetual process of new beginnings and deeper understanding. Full talk: dynamic.wakingup.com/course/COFFD9B

Sam Harris doesn't really grasp Advaita in some important ways, because there are literally ZERO "contradictions" when Consciousness is Primal and pure being. It solves everything in an ultimate sense.

Nobody in his right mind will considere Sam Harris a philosopher. Bernardo Kastrup gives him a clear description.

Let me clarify a better way to approach this because the title is too vast and consequently discussion is all over the place, is to compare purusha from samkhya with What is the difference between purusha in samkhya vs rigpa in Tibetan dzogchen buddhism In the philosophical system of Samkhya and in Tibetan Dzogchen Buddhism, the concepts of "purusha" and "rigpa" represent different ideas and have distinct meanings. While both terms relate to spiritual aspects of human experience, they emerge from different philosophical traditions and have different implications. Purusha in Samkhya: In Samkhya philosophy, purusha refers to the eternal, unchanging, and pure consciousness or spirit. According to Samkhya, the universe consists of two fundamental realities: purusha (consciousness) and prakriti (matter). Purusha is considered to be distinct from the physical body and the material world. It is characterized by pure awareness, devoid of any attributes or qualities. In Samkhya, the ultimate goal is to attain liberation (moksha) by realizing the distinction between purusha and prakriti and disidentifying with the material world. Rigpa in Tibetan Dzogchen Buddhism: In Tibetan Dzogchen Buddhism, rigpa is a term used to describe the innate, primordial awareness or pure consciousness. It is considered to be the intrinsic nature of mind, which is naturally present in all sentient beings. Rigpa is seen as the ultimate reality that transcends dualistic conceptual thinking and ordinary perception. It is a state of non-dual awareness that is open, clear, and luminous. In Dzogchen, the focus is on recognizing and directly realizing rigpa as the true nature of mind through direct experience, leading to liberation or enlightenment. While both purusha in Samkhya and rigpa in Dzogchen refer to consciousness or awareness, there are some differences between the two: Context: Purusha is a concept within the Samkhya philosophical framework, which is one of the six classical schools of Indian philosophy. Rigpa, on the other hand, is a concept specifically within the Tibetan Buddhist tradition, particularly associated with Dzogchen teachings. Emphasis: Samkhya places emphasis on understanding the duality between purusha (consciousness) and prakriti (matter), and liberation is achieved through discerning their distinction. Dzogchen, on the other hand, emphasizes recognizing and resting in the non-dual nature of rigpa, directly realizing it as the essence of mind. Approach: Samkhya philosophy involves a systematic analysis of the components of existence, including the mind-body complex, to discern the nature of purusha and prakriti. Dzogchen, on the other hand, emphasizes direct non-conceptual awareness and the direct transmission of rigpa from a qualified teacher. It's important to note that this explanation provides a general understanding of the concepts of purusha and rigpa. Both Samkhya and Dzogchen have complex and nuanced teachings, and further exploration and study would yield a deeper understanding of these concepts within their respective traditions.

W need a talk between Swami Sarvapriyananda and B. Alan Wallace, also a talk of Swami ji with Jordan Peterson will be great.

Anatman (Buddhism) is a very different concept to Atman (Hinduism)

Regarding how the Buddhists teaching of non-dual (via the Tibetan traditions like Dozchen, Mahamudra.. and Zen teachings), How does Advaita/advaya refutes Samkhya (tirthika)? Or its answer to Madhyamaka? For example, I understand Advaita (non-dual) is not talking about some THING ('S'elf/Atman/Brahman).. and Madhyamaka Buddhism isn't talking about NOTHING.. and that BOTH are talking something that is not a thing (NO-THING). And is the path to end of psychological suffering via Madhyamaka Buddhist śūnya (void) or Advaita's Purna (infinite), the same? 1 - religion faith 2 - yoga techniques to mystical experience (chant/breath/etc) to show you are not the mind 3 - Samkhya ->advaita inquiry: hearing/study, contemplation/reason, meditation I understand Chan (Chinese school of Mahāyāna Buddhism) later became Zen in Japanese.. but I've heard Zen is like Taoism with a splash of Buddhism.. but what is the key differences between dzogchen , Taoism and advaita. Dzogchen practice allows you to recognize the lack of self in every moment?

Sam doesn't get it. He's mired in mind and materialism.

I love this subject, yet not this interchange. Spirituality suffers from any sales effort, and materialism hides in its own bubble at it’s peril. If spiritual truth must “win” on the playing field of suffering and materialism, it faces an impossible task. Define the object from the subject’s point of view. The opening must come from a desire to escape the “dukka” of life.

I don’t care for Harris, but Sawmiji is god 🙏

The mind doesn't distinguish between dreaming and waking life in terms of truth evaluation. So it seems your whole proposition falls on its face. We have no definition for consciousness that tells us anything meaningful. It seems to me this line of reasoning is hopeless. We only see what we name consciousness in beings with minds (and mind isn't well defined itself). You claim to know the cause of a state we cannot conceptualise. You can't step outside of consciousness unless someone puts a bullet in your brain, for example. Qualia doesn't seem so much a mystery to me, as Sam said 'mind' could be instantiated in any substrate where computation exists. Suffering IS the hard problem, not intellect. The numinous matters but 'spirituality as commonly elucidated is an empty term.

When was Advaita vetanda written?

Is this the full conversation?

Indian tradition started with Krishna 11,000 years ago and it began with divine design "Vishnu was the cause of the evolution of the world (universe)" and humans were related to this design, Humans were created by Vishnu with duty to promote evolution by doing good works (karma). The only way to make Vishnu happy is by doing good karma. Vishnu had three steps of 'creation', 'preservation' and 'destruction' in an eternal cyclic universe without end. At the end of the Harappan civilization, Turks (Kuru) from central Asia entered India and replaced Sanatan religion with Hinduism (a Semitic religion) and destroyed the Yadava tribe in the Kurukshetra war 1500-1200 bc, led by the Babylonians, with god Rama (Ramses II- an Egyptian king who had saved the Levant from the ravages of the Sea people). They manipulated the Indian scriptures and theology of Sanatan and replaced it with the Babylonian theology that mankind can reach the status of the divine (like the Sumerian Gilgamesh syndrome). This manipulation created Vedanta, Advaita Vedanta etc. these were polished by the Buddhists but philosophy of Ramanuja prevailed debunking the Sanatan philosophy of Shankara Acharja.

Sam Harris a block of cheese. His thought process is an inch deep and mile wide. Total flop.

Why are you so much worried about ultimate truth in Tibetan Buddhism and non-dual Vedanta? What is ultimate truth in Christianity? Have you ever tried to find out the same? Hinduism is sitting duck for any criticism and very safe for any comment by any Tom, Dick and Harry. Is not it?

Sam Harris is the avatar of misunderstanding in the matter of spiritual awakening. The fact that he titled his book “Waking Up” could not be more ironic given his unrelinquished white-knuckled grip by which he clings to his unawakened materialistic beliefs in spite of whatever spiritual insights and basic logic of the “hard problem” he confronts that belie those beliefs and point to the obvious inability of science to offer an explanation within the confines of a physicalist model . The Swami dealt with him patiently.