Very helpful! Thanks a lot!🙏

Thank you very much! Very helpful 🙏🙏🙏

s na we

Thank you!

Dada ekta proshno, Swamiji in Chicago said we can remember our past life, if we want to do so to understand how much my past life has progressed spiritually, so that I can continue ahead from dat point....since every rebirth is starting from first step again, your thoughts please..🙏❤️

Oh my consciousness!!!

Absolutely

Not enough to be just peaceful, getting into the depths Advaitha Vedanta in both knowledge and practice is must for all

@Ruby Badilla wow my god, please learn to understand, just reading won’t help

@Ruby Badilla Are you from jhopad patti? Or from jholawala begging group?

@Ruby Badilla The explanation is fine. Can you please elaborate on " it is eminently possible to live one's life acquainted with unbroken peace of mind, if destined." I don't understand why you have given an explanation like this to me. Thanks anyway. But your content seems to have been copied repeatedly at a few places in the internet. What could be your purpose of pasting the same content at various places in the internet?

WHAT HAVE U UNDERSTOOD FROM THIS MAY I KNOW ?

I have been listening to Swamiji's videos. But, after listening to this video, my mind could interpret the meaning of Sacchidananda which has definitely improved my clarity on this particular name of God. I don't know how much I have improved. Only swamiji can correct me if there are discrepancies in my understanding. Sat-Chit-Ananda is described as Existence-consciousness-bliss. "I" dwell in my gross body and subtle body as "existence" primarily. I Exist in my gross body and subtle body. "I" am the existential Truth/Sat. If My subtle body leaves My gross body after My gross body's death, I still Exist in the dead body and in the subtle body until they get dissolved in the Samishti (when "I" am liberated). I do Exist always but will be free from them. “I" am also "conscious" of My gross body and subtle body. I am conscious of my thoughts, feelings and emotions. I am also the consciousness expressed in My mind (Awareness/superconscious/Chit). My mind is the tool by which I can express Myself and without My mind, I cannot express Myself But just "Exist". "I" am also the form of an experience called "bliss". My Buddhi could understand/interpret bliss or ananda or unlimitedness as the state of higher satisfaction or desirelessness or highly dispassionate or Complete or a state in which "I" am ultimately satisfied (anantha tripthi) or nothing left for Me to achieve or possess or become. "I", the jeevatma in the body of haripriya munipalli, if can satisfy/reach the above mentioned features of Bhagavan always, "I" am a JeevanMuktha. God is Sacchidananda Who Exists, gets expressed through subtle body and be helpful in being Conscious of all the objects, and Who dwells in Blissful experience. This blissful experience is not just being very happy. It is the state of desirelessness where there is no want for anything and is a feeling of Completeness (poornam).

@@hotdonna27 can you please let me know what according to you is self-realization or what do you understand by that?

@@hotdonna27 So, just like a Ph.D student needs to pass masters before he enters into research, to have peace of mind and end your suffering, it is necessary to work on vedanta knowledge step by step. This is a process and does not happen instantly except in exceptional cases. This is what is given in Vedanta as Shravana, Manana, Nidhi dhyasana. We are not born self-realized. Vedanta helps us to be so after approaching it. Hence, the knowledge of Vedanta is worthy at shravana stage, Manana stage, and also while applying it in Nidhi dhyasana which all happens not in a moment but it takes days, years and life times differing for every individual. So, Vedanta keeps guiding us in this entire path. Only thing we need to do is that we need to stick on to that in every moment of our life. We cannot say that it is not worthy if we are not self realized. We need to BE with it until our self-realization tingles with every cell in the body and does not get shattered in any case.

The same consciousness appearing differently to the human mind.Otherwise it is just consciousness

@Ruby Badilla From which book are these chapters mentioned? where are these chapters mentioned above available?

It's all same reflecting on different objects...like the sun's reflecting on Ocean and rivers

Wow!

That's a nice analogy. I agree.

One of my bigblessing in my life.. myguru ji ❤❤🙏🙏

Thank you so much Swamiji Maharaj. Excellent questions and brilliant answers 🙏

Robert M No he was asking if you had seen the dialog with RS yesterday, refering to a post on KZfaq. Not a meeting with him

@@jankarlsson1444 I interpreted him saying dialog as conversation/discussion between himself and Rupert Spira - do you know the KZfaq post link?

@@jankarlsson1444 Oh, I understand, he must have shown one of Rupert's videos to the group yesterday. That's still very cool.

In the latest video “7. Vedantasara” swami does indeed confirm that he had a conversation with Rupert Spira at 18:50 (in that video, not this one) 🥳 I hope to see a conversation with them online one day.

If you can take out the I, me and my out of that sentence, and still feel the need to perpetutate the cycle of violence, then go ahead and do whatever is necessary.

@@prosenjitroy1614 well of course 👏 always a bit of philosophical wisdom to save the day. Well see how it goes it is a small island, So far the police have done nothing, so Its quite likely there is going to be more opportunities to experience such a devine insight. So next timeThe they, the I, the it, the me, we or whatever it is attacks, it is quite like that this Isness is going to just run the "other" isnesses over with the appearence of one 5,ooo pound 4x4 van. Because this body mind illusion is not wanting to have more pure isness conciousness bliss superimositions desuperimpositions of cracking bones and slicing bleeding skin . Many many holy men have been blissfully slain it the past, and they were much more enlightened than this "I" that seems to be me. So yes, whatever is necessary will be done ✔

Just send.. If its good enough it'll be answered.. Mine got answered that way.. But u gotta watch videos after sending.. They won't send u notifications 😁 ~vbv

@@venkateshpai4080 Where did you send your questions sir??

Vedanta NY website.

@@bhaskarjyaachatterjee আচ্ছা...করে দেখছি...অনেক ধন্যবাদ আপনাকে...

Replace thought with consciousness. Thought emanates from consciousness. So there is no way to experience something which is beyond consciousness. Consciousness appears to have point or infinitesimal existence and attributeless.

eita keu bolbe na. nijeke khuje bar korte hobe

I think it is the everpresent consciousness that we all actually are.

an experience is consciousness + mind. Mind is asleep in deep sleep. How can there be experience of blankness? Consciousness is supposed to be inert by itself "nishkriyo" It cant do anything on its own

TIME is a sequence of events (inextricably linked to space as part of one fabric - spacetime). If there are no events, there is no time. It is also subject to a continual regression of counting backwards. If I say 'before the big bang' we already presuppose the existence of a sequence of events. But that requires change. If consciousness is non material and without qualities, what aspect of it would you change? For example, if two trains are moving side by side at 100mph, a passenger of one train looking out at the other train would not feel that the train is moving. Only if there is a difference in speed can 'change' or difference be recognised. For change to be recognised it must be observed by someone who is relatively less changing. The subject, S, sees the object, A, changing into A1, A2, A3, A4 and so on (the figures representing time). If the subject, S, was not relatively less changing than the object, no change in the object could be discerned. However the subject S, may be observed by another subject which watches subject S as a changing object. If we were to continue this analysis ad infinitum, directing our attention first to the object, then to the subject, we would find the same process operating. Therefore, we must admit that there is, ultimately, one which is constant, in order for change to be recognised at all. That is the changeless eternal consciousness. If consciousness alone exists, there can be logically no concept of 'before consciousness' because consciousness always 'is'. It is the place that subsequent change and hence time is born from. Before 'is' makes no sense.

I could refer you to Swamiji's teachings only - (heavily paraphrased) every (golden) ornament is gold with a name and form. Gold being non-dual, we recognize a form in it by giving it a name (or vice versa). Duality is created by me, the individualized awareness. Gold remains as it is even when appearing in multiplicity. Same with consciousness. The shift to recognize this is in my vision.

@@prosenjitroy1614 I have heard Swami Sarvapriyananda use the metaphor of gold-ornaments, which you allude to, as well as the metaphors of pot-clay and wave-ocean to explain Advaitic teachings to great effect. I must acknowledge that my understanding of Advaita Vedanta was cultivated in part by listening to Swami Sarvapriyananda and for this I will remain forever grateful to him. The mental block I am having is in reconciling the view “Everything is Consciousness” with Sri Shankaracharya’s statement “Brahma satyam jagan-mithya …”. If I am interpreting Sri Shankaracharya correctly, “Everything is an APPEARANCE of Consciousness”. In other words, everything in this empirical world of our existence, i.e., the universe, is not as real as Consciousness; everything only appears to be real after having “borrowed” their reality from Consciousness. So, Consciousness can exist without everything, but everything is dependent on Consciousness for its existence. I have heard Swami Sarvapriyananda quote Swami Vivekananda thus “All is not, God only is” several times. While this agrees with Sri Shankaracharya’s statement, it seems to be at odds with the view “Everything is Consciousness”, which is another reason for my befuddlement. Furthermore, if the universe is indeed Consciousness then since the universe undergoes change Consciousness will be subject to change as well which cannot be. Therefore, I am having difficulty comprehending a direct identity relationship between the universe and Consciousness as seems to be implied in the video, as opposed to the universe as an appearance of Consciousness. Perhaps I should not parse the sound bites from the video literally. Perhaps there is an implied meaning that needs to be understood. Then again, perhaps my understanding of Advaita is flawed and if that is the case then I would like to rectify that.

@@rsr9200 "Everything is Consciousness”“Everything is an APPEARANCE of Consciousness”. These aren't conflicting statements as both point to the One Absolute reality. Whether that be called God,Consciousness,Awareness,Brahman etc. "Everything" just means the whole or totality. Whatever is or isn't,appearing or not appearing is Consciousness/the Absolute, and nothing but that. Note that what is being discussed here (i.e Truth /Realization) comes from those who have experientially realized ultimate reality and have tried to convey it, to the best of their ability, through language (written or spoken). If unrealized it's "Philosophy". If realized experientially, it is Self Realization orTruth. So it is inevitable that there will be,(depending on who has written about it or is teaching it), slightly different but not conflicting ways of communicating the same basic idea. "I have heard Swami Sarvapriyananda quote Swami Vivekananda thus “All is not, God only is”. If "All" is taken to be something perceived as separately existing,different or distinct from God,then "All" is not reality. If 'All" is taken/percieved to be one,singular,non separate,non dual,non different ,non distinct, then "All" is God and nothing but God. "Furthermore, if the universe is indeed Consciousness then since the universe undergoes change Consciousness will be subject to change as well which cannot be." Consciousness,being the only reality, consists of what can only be considered paradoxical to the mind/intellect. Mind/intellect can only comprehend through a conceptual framework,and can't comprehend a reality where seemingly conceptual opposites are the same or non separate. In this case Consciousness can be said to be stillness in motion, form and formlessness, changing and unchanging,permanent and impermanent. But when experientially realized, the truth or reality of You, which is not other than Consciousness, is singular, unchanging, eternal ,indestructible, timeless, beginningless, unborn, unending, formless etc. In the end, language (which is naturally conceptual) can only fail to describe what Consciousness or God or Whatever you want to call it is, because it is beyond mind/language. You(if you have the talent or gift to teach) can get close,but close isn't the real "no-thing" thing,loll. ❤️

@@toddf910 Thank you for engaging with me on this subject. I interpret appearance to mean semblance, which accords with the definition of that word in Merriam-Webster. Therefore, I make a distinction between “Absolute reality” and “appearance of Absolute reality” like the distinction one makes between truth and the semblance of truth. Likewise, Merriam-Webster defines “everything” to be “all that exists” which I interpret to be all that can be perceived by the senses or experienced by the mind or conceived/inferred by the intellect. Also, if I am interpreting your views correctly, we agree that Consciousness cannot be accessed by the senses or grasped by the mind. Hence, I hold that everything is not Consciousness. Of course, I recognize that the ultimate reality of everything is Consciousness with that reality being independent of everything, remaining untouched and unaffected by everything. It seems to me that your view that “Whatever is or isn't, appearing or not appearing is Consciousness/the Absolute, and nothing but that” contradicts the Advaitic view that Consciousness is “unlimited is-ness awareness”, which indicates that there is no place where Consciousness isn’t and no time when Consciousness isn’t. Discernment between reality (satyam) and appearance of reality (mithya) is critical for those seeking moksha in this life, like me, who have chosen the Advaitic path laid out by Sri Shankaracharya. So, this is not an exercise in philosophical navel gazing for me as it may appear on surface. Also, I have neither the qualifications nor the talent nor the desire to teach anybody anything about Vedanta. I just view forums like this as a virtual satsang for exchanging views with other seekers in furtherance of our shared goal. Finally, I am grateful to Swami Sarvapriyananda and Vedanta NY for two subsequent videos after this, i.e., Vedantasara (Texts 33-34) and “Asanga Aham - The Unattached Self”, which reinforced the distinction between reality and appearance of reality for me and allayed my concerns about the validity of my assumptions.

​@@rsr9200 If I understand your question properly, I think the confusion could come from the limitation of language. In "everything is consciousness", the "consciousness" is not referred to as an entity (but "everything" is). So this is not a statement of identity (in the strict sense, such as an entity is identical to another entity). Also, an identity relationship should be reversible, e.g. A is B so that B is also A, but this case does not qualify as we can only say "everything is consciousness" but not "consciousness is everything". What it's meant here is that "consciousness" is the essence of "everything", which is at a different level of reality from "everything", just like in the reality/appearance examples of gold/ornament and clay/pot. Since "consciousness" and "everything" are at two different levels of reality, it is possible that "everything" can change while "consciousness" remains unchanged.

Brain wave is still a matter although a subtle matter. It changes with time. Consciousness is fundamental, it does not change with time rather time is because of consciousness and not other way round. I am not as learned as Swamiji but telling in brief that he would have explained in detail.

@@OzInIndia Yes, of course, and there are no brain waves in a dead body. Maybe I should refine the question: What is the relationship between brain waves and the 5 Koshas?

@@bradstephan7886 Brain waves will correspond to Manomaya kosha. It helps in processing thoughts and defines our emotional experience. In itself, they don't have intelligence and hence did not term them under Viganamayi kosha. However, pancha kosha point to fact that we are not any kosha but different from it. Swamii has a nice video explaining Pancha Kosha.

@@bradstephan7886 brain wave doesn't belong to any kosha... It's an outward physical manifestation of thought generated at subtle level in the subtle body.... After death there is no subtle body to propel thought... And thus no brain wave exist. To give a better analogy... A bulb radiates light and heat as long as there is current and the cause of current is electrons...

Not at all it's still there as we experience as deep sleep. Or endless dream state ..

Yeah.