Video 10

Ask Swami with Swami Sarvapriyananda | Oct 24th, 2021

[Music] oh lead me from the unreal to the real lead me from darkness unto light lead me from death to immortality om peace peace peace as diane just said we have the ask swami session today and the idea being that so many questions come into us from all over the world and it's really impossible to answer them individually so we thought of having this online forum the advantages the questions and the answers can be shared with the whole world then uh often it's not so much that it's my question i'll have to wait for my question to come up no often these questions are are something that everybody has a lot of people have these questions sometimes when we listen to the questions and answers we get benefited so um i was also told that that your the virtual audience might be a little less today there is an india pakistan cricket match going on so people from india might be distracted so if it's cricket and vedanta vedanta always loses the match but that's why you see the importance of the preliminary qualifications we call them sadhana the fourfold qualifications for vedanta viveka varaga and so forth vairagya means dispassion that which is non-eternal that which is not the ultimate goal purpose destiny of humanity that you'll have to step aside from that in favor of spirituality in favor of vedanta but it's always been it's been a perennial problem for a perennial philosophy a perennial problem i have heard of this uh it's a anecdote but true i uh there's this monk who is to come on the bank of the ganga in a village and teach vedanta so one of those students a village boy he wrote he became a monk later and he wrote this he said we used to go to the class and there would be people coming and sitting around the monk under it he would sit under a tree and teach vedanta one day they were hardly anybody i was there and one or two others and the rest of the crowd had disappeared and the monk was shocked what happened where are the rest said oh what can we say sir a tantric has come he has set up class on the other side of the river and everybody has gone there so tantra is is much more attractive you get superpowers like we become something like superman or spiderman whatever yes so dispassion the discernment between the eternal and the non-eternal and the dispassion for the non-eternal those are qualifications for vedanta they are called viveka and vairagya all right so we shall uh go into this and dan will ask a few of the questions which have been selected by our team uh very hard working team and then we will also take a few questions from the live audience present here in person audience all right so swami the first couple of questions are on the ashtavakra gira diksha sharma from india asks i seek some clarification on ashtavakra samita the seventh verse says that you are the seer of all the eighth verse says drink the nectar of faith that i am not the doer so my confusion here is if the self is the ultimate reality and only subject and the entire universe is just an appearance then who is the doer indeed who is the doer you are the witness consciousness and you are not the doer of any action and yet there is action going on who is the doer if we are only pure consciousness and that's the only reality what about action and the doer of action the results of action karma all of that who is there who's doing what so this these questions are fundamental if you confront these questions and make a breakthrough here you'll be able to grasp the essence of advaita vedanta it's a very good question i think deeksha is referring to the seventh and eighth verses of the first chapter of ashtavakra it says drastasi you are the witness of all and the next verse says you can be convinced have drink the you know the nectar of faith means have firm conviction that you are actually not the doer of of karma how do we understand this then who is the doer of karma i'll give you two examples and this will make it a little more clear hopefully one is say electricity and you can see all the light here it's because of electricity shining through the through the bulbs are shining because electricity enables them to do so and if you were to switch on the fans you would get air breeze from the fans and an electric heater will give you the same electricity will give you heat so if you ask who is the doer of all these deeds giving light who gives light here and who gives debris here who gives heat here who is that omnipotent thing it's it's electricity through multiple devices but in electricity by itself does it shine does it give you a cool breeze does it heat up the room no it doesn't it's not supposed to that's not its inner and correct characteristic but it can power the devices that do so similarly consciousness brahman atman our real nature in conjunction with the mind and the senses it lights up the mind and the senses and you become a knower you the witness the witness and the knower make a distinction witness and knower in sanskrit sakshi and pramata witness don't take it in the sense of an act of witnessing just take it as like light shining so consciousness shines that's its very nature it's not doing any activity it's just being itself but when that shining is in proximity to the mind and the senses you say where did the mind and senses come from put it aside for the time being we will see later but in proximity with the mind and the senses it becomes a seer and uh something that hears and touches and tastes and smells and thinks and remembers and desires and knows and so the witness is now the knower when you put a layer of mind and sensory organs over it put a layer of the motor organs that vary consciousness which is the witness consciousness through the mind through the body uses the motor organs to walk and talk and you know do all of that it becomes the doer another example would be say a dream suppose you dreamt that you were walking down broadway now after waking up what would you say that oh it was just a dream i was not in broadway i was not walking i was just happily sleeping on my bed but if you take the dream experience and in the dream experience you ask who was walking you would say well if you press me on that i am the only one who was walking not only that the shopkeeper who was selling the goods the actor on broadway who was uh reading out his lines all that i was basically if you if you press me but ultimately none of that because they're all appearances in the dreamer's mind similarly from the perspective of consciousness the world the body the senses the mind all of them are appearances in consciousness not very difficult to understand and just compare it with the dream example in your own dream the mind by itself does it not appear as a dream world does it not appear as a body in the dream and the mind and sensory system in the dream in your dream do you not feel do you say that in the dream i can't see anything because after all i'm dreaming there are no eyes here to see no no if there is a world to see and there are eyes to see there are sounds to hear there are ears to hear and so and so forth and all of that the objects of the senses and the senses themselves are all appearances in the dreamers mind similarly everything here is an appearance in consciousness so to the answer to your question who is that who knows who is that who does any actions ultimate answer nobody because there's ultimately nothing to be known and no no action which is being done it's an appearance but if that seems too much and you want a straight answer to no there is action who is doing it you are doing it but i am pure consciousness i do not do anything correct but with the layer of the mind and the senses and the body appearing from that perspective you alone are the doer who else is doing if you introduce one more factor god the god of religion then you attribute everything to god god with the power of maya does everything and we are just here for the ride god is what is the thing that jesus take the wheel there's a song so god takes the wheel that is true if you don't want to introduce god language and yet you don't want to go to all the way to the extreme of advaita saying that nothing is happening and no one is doing anything in that case nature is doing it's a very scientifically acceptable position material nature is doing everything you are consciousness the witness of the activity of material nature what is material nature doing whole universe big bang till now created by material nature body created maintained activated by material nature material nature is prakriti from the breathing to the flow of blood in our veins to the activity of the brain and the neurons even the mind all of that is nature very much acceptable by science only thing that we will abstract from this is that you the consciousness are the witness of the activities of nature or the experience of the activities of nature you are not a product of those activities this is the only way place where we will very justifiably differ from the reductionist materialist worldview whose world views this sankhya this is a sankhyan worldview which differentiates between consciousness and its objects all objects are in the realm of matter and you are consciousness so these are different ways in which you can answer this question yes so uh anita iyer from seattle also has a question on the ashtavakra i had a question on a couple of verses of ashtavakra gida in chapter 7 and chapter 15. i am using verse descriptions from thomas byram below in chapter 7 verse 4 verse 4 states i am not in the world the world is not in me i am pure i am unbounded free from attachment free from desire still even so am i in chapter 15 verse 6 it states for see the self is in all beings and all beings are in the self know you are free free of i free of mine be happy at the outset the first two lines of both above verses seem to contradict themselves but i believe they are saying the same thing in a different way is my understanding correct we seem to contradict themselves they do not seem to contradict they are flat out contradictions in one verse ashtavakra says that i am free of the world i am not in the world the world is not in me there is no universe in me no external world no body no mind nothing i am an unbounded limitless consciousness not just i you might say ashtavakra you're nuts he's saying you are that and in this other verse he says what does he say that all the world is in me uh everybody's in me second one all beings and all beings are in the self is in all beings and all beings are in the self first he says i am not in the world not in all beings not in the world and the word is also not in me and now he says the self is in all beings and all beings are in the self you often come across this language in the upanishads in the gita the self in all beings and all beings in the self flat out contradiction the world is not in me the world is in me in the bhagavad-gita there's a chapter the ninth chapter it's called the royal secret the royal knowledge raj of india yoga the yoga of the royal secret royal knowledge what's the secret what's this knowledge krishna says that um in me all beings are there one verse the next verse he says yoga my shawaryam all beings are not in me and he puts them together one after another and then he says this is the magic of my yoga how is this possible it's flat out contradiction and yet this must be grasped it's absolutely logical and you will see it makes complete sense when we grasp this we grasp advaita vedanta one sadhu in uttarakhand he said when these two contradictory statements will be understood not accepted not believed not in a zen sense a very cool thing to say no absolutely understood absolutely logically and you'll see how clear and logical it is it must be so then he says then you will understand advaita vedanta so very good question we must confront this this will open up the heart of advaita vedanta to us what does it mean to say that all beings are in me first and then say that all beings are not in me it's not difficult to understand um i remember this very beautiful lake in british columbia and in near vancouver loon lake early in the morning i was taking a walk there and you've seen this diane has seen this yes it's a crystal clear lake without a ripple of water a ripple on the surface of the water absolutely crystal clear and there if you look into the lake you will see you know it's surrounded by forests and hills you will see the hills and the forest you will see the blazing blue sky above everything you'll see in the lake in the lake you will see the sky in the lake you will see the trees in the lake you will see the hills of course these are reflections now think of the lake itself in the lake all of it is there the sky and the trees and the hills and yet it is true that none of it is there if you actually touch the lake what will you find water you touch the sky in that lake what will you find water you touch the hill in that lake what will you find water touch the trees in that lake which appear in that lake what will you find water obviously you will say swami these are reflections and i can see the question in your eyes is a reflection there is a real sky and a real hill and a real tree all around abstract that bracket that out keep that away why you will say you'll protest why should i do that remember it's an example salaam krishna would say upama akdeshi an example is meant to prove a point an example is not supposed to be exactly like what it is showing in that case it wouldn't be an example it would be that thing x is an example of why it's only because x and y are different you can use one example one as an example of the other if uh to say something about the other thing but go further i mean even here in the lake example the lake can honestly say where is the sky and about the reflections sky and the and the hills and the trees lick and say they are all in me but wait a minute that's not the end of it the message is still there that none of them are in me because in me what is there water and only water they all appear in me you can get an even better example the dream example where take the example of the man walking down broadway now when you wake up you say broadway was in me and all the people there were in me and the sky and the road and the buildings were in me i myself was walking down broadway i was in me in me means in me the dreamer the dreamer's mind and yet i can say none of them invariant me how can a street be in the mind how can actually a physical concrete building be in the mind how can people living beings be in the mind no they were all appearances in the mind they were all dreamt up by the mind they were imaginations in dream objects of fiction fictitious can you not honestly say they were all in me see how does it work when we are in the dream these things appear separate from me it seems i am walking down broadway broadway is separate from me the buildings are separate from me and all those people are outside me when i wake up from the dream can i not honestly say with astonishment wow they were not outside me all of that was in me when i was dreaming it was in me so first everything is outside me just like what it looks like right now it looks like this right now the people are outside me and the building is outside me obviously the chair is outside me and i'm sitting on it there's an external world outside my awareness which i'm experiencing through my awareness that's what it feels like step one but when we wake up from a dream what happens is whatever seemed external to me now is understood to be entirely internal to me i imagined it all in my dream step 3 you will also say honestly truly none of that was really in me because they were imaginations there really wasn't a building in my head there really there's no space even the most empty head there's no space for broadway to be there and by the way all this i'm not making up on this part of the moment these are arguments taken from one of the classics of advaita vedanta gowda padas manduka karika the second chapter godupada who was shankaracharya's teacher's teacher lived about fourteen hundred years ago the second chapter waitatio there he gives these arguments comparing the waking world with the dream world so from that perspective can we say all of this is in me the consciousness and because they are all appearances in consciousness there's actually not a physical world of concrete and you know trees and cats and dogs in consciousness there are appearances in consciousness what is the consequence of this tremendous consequence first consequence is oneness when you have an external world we are this tiny creature only and they are all outside me they are different from me i interact with them some are friendly some are indifferent some are inimical to me but from the perspective of consciousness and they're all in me they're all nothing but me i am one with all of them or they are all one with me all the living beings not only all human beings the ones i like and the ones i do not like they're all one with me they're nothing other than me all the other living beings also all the non-living entities chairs and table sky and earth they're all nothing other than me i alone appear as all of them there is oneness there is limitlessness if all of it is in me or appearing in me where is my limit where do i stop you understand the question um in the common sense waking world where do i stop i end here upanishad says at the tip of my nails up to my fingertip i am there beyond that not me it's other than me it's the other that's the common sense approach but from this perspective and think about your dream experience where is the limit where is you the dreaming mind where is your limit in the dream world nowhere because everything that you say in the dream world you have not stopped there you pervade all of it because it's all appearing in you so this entire waking world and the dream world and the deep sleep blankness it all appears in you the consciousness there is no limit to you you are not only everything is one with you you are also limitless these appearances have beginnings or ends these appearances have beginnings or ends but consciousness itself does not have a beginning or end in consciousness things have their beginning or end so you are without beginning and end you are eternal you are the universe is one with you you are infinite you are eternal limitless and eternal whom will you hate whom will you love whom will you be partial to because they are all you who is your enemy who is your friend what is it here in this world which you have not achieved which you would like to have because it's all you what is it in this world which you hate which you would like to get rid of it is all you but then that's a big problem all horrible things are me but ultimately they are not you they are appearances in you just like a nightmare might be in you but it's not real that's the relief that it's not real it's an appearance beginnings and ends all those we meet with and you have a relation and then we get separated from them they're all one with you they appeared as that person and at one time they have gone now but really they have not gone that which appeared as that other person with whom you know father mother husband wife children and now they are not there but that appearance is not there that which appeared is still there that is you it's a very high point of view but it this is the way to understand advaita vedanta to apparently contradictory things all beings are in me and amazingly none of it is in me i'm free of all beings and that's not just krishna that's all of us we are that reality right now good so these notice these two questions which came up can you see that they are basically the same question the first question was that i am pure consciousness i do not do anything and yet it is true that you that pure consciousness you are the only knower that there is the only seer the one who hears smells states tastes touches the one who thinks remembers um desires loves hates there's none other than you that consciousness the doer of all actions you alone are the doer and yet it is true to say you are not the doer of any action at all that was the first question and the second question is all beings are in me but all beings are not in me they are the same question you see if you can see that one is from an um technically if you say one is from an epistemological perspective the other one is from an ontological metaphysical perspective one is from the perspective of knowledge knowing and also doing and the other one is from the perspective of being existence all beings should we have somebody to ask a question is there anybody who wants to ask so many people why don't you come up here uh or where should they come there come here come here and ask the question tell us your name and then ask the question yes while you're asking the question you can take it off hello swami my name is ashwin um i was curious about your thoughts on the role of psychedelics and spiritual and mystical experiences uh especially also for example the role of soma or the kooky on in ancient greek mysteries to occasion um the the theory that that it might have been a psychedelic potion or substance that arjuna consumed to have the vision that he had in chapter 11 of the gita all right the question about the role of psychedelics in spiritual life now uh you might say this is a peculiarly american phenomenon or a very california phenomenon but it's not really it goes all the way back to ancient india in you'll be surprised to know patanjali yoga in the yoga sutras it's mentioned that one may induce some of these experiences through the use of certain psychedelic substances now let's go a little deeper into this um a couple of examples right now for example we have the well-known um neuroscientist koch who is the chief scientist of the paul allen brain institute so i was listening to his talk on consciousness and he's been experimenting with psychedelics there is one which is very popular among researchers now silo celo sabin i keep forgetting the name so he's done that and he said i have had extraordinary experiences and that has somehow convinced him about the importance of consciousness itself another very famous example was um um aldous huxley a long way back about 40 50 years his book classic book the perennial philosophy unfortunately not many people read it now it's a classic collection wonderful collection he was deeply connected with the vedanta society of southern california and in fact he used to give talks and in hollywood in the vedanta society there he was a disciple of swami prabhavanandaji but he experimented with in those days lsd and swami prabhupada actually warned him against doing that they differed on that but he swami warned him against using psychedelics all right what can it do and what can it not do what it can do in fact the only thing that it can do is it can induce extraordinary experiences you can i i suppose you can have visions see lights and sounds and the sense of a can also have a sense of a tremendous breakthrough you know like an intuitive understanding feelings of oneness in fact which echo what is mentioned in the in the texts in the yoga and vedanta texts now what does vedanta say about it and yoga say about it from the yogic perspective yes these insights these mystical experiences give you the knowledge which yoga aims at so with this experience you will realize that i am not the body and mind and all of this is illumined by me the one consciousness and so on so some kind of breakthrough might happen now the point that yoga will make there is twofold here one is that these insights can be and should be generated by yoga practice not psychedelics why not yoga practice is long and arduous psychedelics is fast you just pop a pill and you become enlightened [Music] because that long and arduous practice of yoga makes the mind satwik pure and able to hold on to these spiritual experiences and benefit from them then it becomes a truly spiritual experience otherwise it's like a flash in a pan one gets an extraordinary feeling feeling of elevation feeling of insight something tremendous understanding something amazing and then you're back to normal with a thud you know back to the external world unable to benefit from that how do you know you're unable to benefit from that you will see no significant changes are coming in our life there are ultimately no significant spiritual takeaways from in the sense of our thinking our speech and our activity in the world you still behave like the same old person worse the second thing that yoga will say for this kind of practice is it can be actually positively damaging it can be addictive often many of these substances were highly addictive and they can be damaging to the personality the very personality which is seeking to be enlightened it can instead of taking making the satwik it can push you down to rajas and thomas also yeah what is the state of an addict is it saturday rajasthan which is just the opposite of what you are trying to attain so the take away from the yogic perspective is that yes they do induce certain experiences which are very similar to spiritual experiences but they will not be classified as spiritual experiences because they the mind is not capable of benefiting from them the personality is not capable of benefiting from them after psychedelics does one become a saint does the sinner become a saint no emphatically after long arduous spiritual practice struggle of yoga does the spirit sinner become the saint quite possible that is the goal the second thing would be that it can be actually positively damaging so this is the take away from the yoga system but let's go deeper now i'm going to the vedant or advaita system advaita will make the preliminary point that what's the point of all these experiences the point of experiences is to show you the truth of the claims of the spiritual path that you are not the body not the mind that you are the limitless consciousness this should become clear to you that knowledge is the take away not a series of wonderful visions you see one of the problems of the new age movement is while it is liberal while it is open while it is peaceful compared to the old religions but the new age movement also sometimes becomes a kind of experience chasing pill popping experience chasing nowhere more so than our central park here so uh but experience chasing was not the goal of any of the ancient systems even the patanjali yoga system which talks about samadhis and various mystical experiences the goal is enlightenment not seeing lights or visions what advaita would say is that ultimately what have you got when you see a burst of light or even when you have the feeling the oceanic feeling of oneness with everything what advaita would say is that note the same consciousness the same awareness you who did not see those things earlier are now seeing those extraordinary things you are having those extraordinary experiences very soon you will not have those experiences again until you pop the next pill so that same consciousness is there it is to that one consciousness that experiences both extraordinary and ordinary appear the experience the content of the experience is not important it is the one which is having those experiences one which is illumining and revealing those experiences that is important notice in advaita vedanta what we do we never change extraordinary experiences the method of the seer in the scene the method of the five sheets the method of the waking dreaming deep sleep waking dreaming deep sleep are the extraordinary experiences so no they are daily experiences of everybody all of us have those experiences you're awake now it's getting a little hotter here might fall asleep very soon so waking dreaming deep sleep they are all ordinary experiences and advaita vedanta claims that these ordinary experiences are enough they are enough to give you enlightenment how if ordinary experiences were enough to give us enlightenment everybody would be enlightened because everybody has an ordinary experience not the experience by themselves experience and the investigation of those experience experiences by advaita you need waking dreaming deep sleep absolutely but with that you must add manduk you need the physical body the the vital body the the mental body the intellectual body the the causal body you know i'm talking about the five sheets the anna maya prana maya mano my abigail that's all there already nothing mystical about it it's all there right now all of us have it right now plus you need the taiti upanishad to guide you through it to the realization that you are the witness consciousness so the ordinary experience is sufficient for enlightenment in advaita vedanta you don't need to pop pills you don't even need to do extraordinary efforts to attain certain peculiar mystical experiences and there's a special advantage today special advantage is even if one has extraordinary mystical experiences a scientist neuroscientist a doctor might just say i don't doubt you have those experiences suppose you're the experience of oneness of the universe you feel one with everything the doctor or the neuroscientist will simply say that that's because um you had certain neuro chemicals from affected your brain that way you felt that that does not mean the universe is one with you it just continues to be the same old universe you felt it just because you feel something does not mean it's real but what does advaita do advaita does not use extraordinary experiences to claim that the universe is one no it what it does is it uses ordinary experience and then reason logic rigorously argued logic to show you the universe must be one with you from the perspective of consciousness not from the body perspective that is much more acceptable that is much more at least much more difficult to refute you can go to the same doctor same neuroscientist and you can do that actually it's being done now and tell them we are not talking about mystical experiences we are not talking about popping pills and psychedelics but let's just take the experience which you doctor you uh professor you have it and i have it and then reason on that and you come to this conclusion the same conclusion yeah so that's my answer thank you so much uh we'll come to you next now we can take a question from the audience internet audience this question is on bhakti from raghav kumar why is the path of bhakti supposed to be dualistic rather than non-dualistic why is the path of bhakti supposed to be dualistic rather than non-dualistic well in a very preliminary way it's a it's pretty reasonable i love somebody the moment you say i love immediately some people will ask whom do you love what do you love there must be an object of love i love what you can even say i love everybody but still there must be something that you love the moment you do that there is there's there are two there is the lover and there is the loved what you love it must be in some sense separate from you even when you say i love myself it will be peculiar way of putting it but it might be all right but there also it is i the experience of the i the knower loving something about myself there must be some of some quality something that i'm loving so there is a sense of dualism always in love and nothing wrong with it that enables love to exist now can love be non-dualistic yes notice the very tendency of love is oneness it's not separation it may start with two but any kind of love actually unites the lover and the loved this funny story swami vivekananda right here in in the united states he once came to his uh the place where he was staying and told the lady who was the you know the with whom he was staying this devotee you know i have fallen in love and the lady laughed and said who is the lucky woman swamiji and he said oh it's not a woman it's organization but it must be something so there is a separation sense of separation and that generates love but that love tends to oneness [Music] in advaitha also bhakti is possible there's an advaita bhakti which is possible not theoretically you see it in the lives of great masters of non-duality they realize i am one with brahman but they are full of devotion for god from a distance logically it seems to be contradictory you are one with god then whom who is loving whom but bhakti is entirely possible if after advaithic knowledge one can walk and talk and eat and drive and do everything and give talks all of that why can you not have devotion for god so it is possible in advaita bhakti what happens is you realize your oneness with the ultimate reality i am brahman but in this world of difference it appears you know it is all one reality you know it but it still appears as different and you still appear as one person in this vast world from that perspective you can act in the world and you do act in the world and you can also have devotion for god that oneness you you realized i am that reality it now appears to you as your beloved god sriram krishna put it beautifully he said to swami akanda his disciple what is the relationship between bhakti and knowledge he said in bengali jejar ishta atma whoever is your chosen deity that is the self itself that is brahman for you you're your own self see atma i am the self and i realize the infinitude of myself that is advaita vedanta that's a very simple way of putting it i realize my own infinitude that is advaita vedanta infinity means limitlessness and bhakti is there is god i have faith in god i've i worship god rituals prayer puja what not devotion songs so they seem to be two different things here sriram krishna brings them together that krishna or kali whom you worship you visualize in your heart and repeat the mantra and have love and devotion for god in that form that chosen deity and the advaithic atman pure consciousness they are one and the same they seem to be two different things because of the intervention of a name and foreign name form and function so advaita bhakti is entirely possible there's a beautiful saying before enlightenment before the realization i am brahman duality separation leads to samsara moha delusion i am only this body this person and they are all separate from me and there is this world this is our common sense approach it leads to delusion it leads to samsara it leads to suffering after enlightenment what is the enlightenment i am brahman i am this limitless existence consciousness place after enlightenment if you again bring in deliberately bhakti ortam kalpitamdwaitam kalpidam dam an imagined duality and it's easy to bring it in because it appears like that it appears like a world out there though it is one reality but it appears to be a separate world there appear to be separate people once this is accepted you you bring it in and then why would you maintain it why would you give it any importance this world of duality for samsari people for worldly people is the world which worldly people inhabit where they seek their pleasure where they try to avoid their pain but for the devotee for the enlightened person this world of difference is the occasion and the possibility of bhakti of love a superimposed a virtually generated duality you act it is accepted in order to love god why would you do that it says advaita sundaram it is more beautiful than non-duality non-duality is kind of dry all the non-dual masters will be annoyed with me before saying that you notice when you say joy in non-duality anand the bliss what kind of anand are we looking at there it is explained as limitlessness purnathwa completeness since i am whole since i am limitless there's nothing that i could want but that kind of joy that kind of fulfillment is a very peaceful um a very philosophical kind of peace it is not the delight you feel in you know when you chant hariram hare krishna and sing and dance that's a different kind of delight so to taste that delight there must be a component of dualistic bhakti there dualistic not ultimately dual but dualistic bhakti and all this explanation is just a sort of theoretical way of you know churning trying to get understand it the best ways to look at the lives of enlightened people even in the greatest of gyani's non-dual masters of non-duality you will see a component of bhakti there swami ranganath who was the 13th president of our order so he was a great vedant and he toured more than 60 countries in those days and uh giving talks on vedante everybody you felt that he was a person firmly centered in vedanta and when he was the president of our order one of the things that the president of the order does in balor mata our main monastery is every morning the president goes to the temple of sri ramakrishna the temple of holy mother and so on the temple is there it's part of the routine but that swami would not swami ranganathan diji would not do that every day so he thought maybe it's a health issue or something or maybe he doesn't want to because he's we don't need for him temples and images and puja might be secondary so we are foolish immature we make this clear distinction you know that is non-dualism this is dualism so i asked one of his uh cevas savage means the assistant monks or the young monks who work with the president what was what was going on and he said oh no the problem was when he would go into the temple of sri ramakrishna it was difficult to bring him out of that he would keep saying five minutes more five minutes more let me stay a little more listen more it's not that the knowledge of non-duality kills devotion not at all it makes devotion real krishna says in the bhagavad-gita i have four kinds of devotees couple of them are worldly in the sense that they want things in the world people are in trouble in suffering um grieving in sorrow they are devoted to god that's one kind and they are devotees the second kind is they are all right they have no problem but they want something in the world something better something more you know more power more riches more um let my book be a bestseller and so on and so forth things like that they're also devotees but they want something and then there's a third one the spiritual seeker which would be people like who are here us those who are seeking god realization and then he says there is a fourth kind of devotee krsna says who's devoted to me who garniture the enlightened one the one who has realized i am brahmana you o krishna and i we are not different we are the one reality with one limitless consciousness and krishna says that person is also my devotee and then he goes on to say they're all dear to me but dearest to me closest to me is the enlightened one why he very beautiful verse he says for i never disappeared from his sight and he is ever with me for the rest what happens is it's a matter of belief of faith of psychological support or a spiritual quest i must have god realization all of that is fine but for the enlightened one i am real he knows me in truth and he is always in me he or she is always in me so bhakti after enlightenment bhakti after non-duality it's it's entirely possible when you say why bhakti is supposed to be dualistic there's nothing there's a sort of a hint of isn't it some are you saying it's little lower no dualistically non-dualistically we are coming in touch with the same reality all right one more question there is another question on bhakti yes swamiji you said that god fearing is not about bhakti but most of the pujas and myths in hinduism are all about do this or do that otherwise god will punish you why this tradition so at one point i think in the retreat i had said that fear of god is not bhakti but i'd also said that bhakti or devotion to god may start with fear god is awesome in the original meaning of the word and also in the american meaning of the word awesome god is awesome if you can conceive of god of when we first approach the very idea of god it is it can induce deep reverence and can use fear also so many um religions theistic religions start by inculcating fear of god but what is the objection to that the objection is fear is not a good friend to love the ultimate objection or the ultimate goal being love of god adoration of god worship of god fear is not a good path to go it may start there but quickly it must proceed from fear to awe to reverence to love to adoration to worship so look at the the gradations given in in the path of bhakti first it starts with shanta bhava shanta bhava means something like the advaitin has an approach of complete calm and serenity in the presence of god but higher than that is dasya bhava the lord is my master i am thy servant that's higher than the shanta bhava but that's closer from a calm philosophical contemplation of the vastness awesomeness of the divine to the divine is a personal relationship so the beauty of bhakti is in vedanta what we do is we demonize our human relations and um and humanize our our relation with with god we um demonize our relations with the human with everybody we see we see the divinity in you we see god in you and with god we have a human relationship so master and servant the award my lord i am thy servant is a human relationship higher than that sakya bhava not master and servant friend notice we're coming closer friend from santa the peaceful attitude of a philosophical contemplation to dasia the servant and master relationship to friends the lord is my friend buddy then you go further what's earlier the lord is my child so baby the krishna or you know gopala or the baby rama ramallah or the divine mother as a little girl or the baby jesus so what is the point of seeing god as a child it is to develop this whatsapp means the love of a parent towards god so that love of parent towards the child is now towards god now if you think of god as your child you don't go and pray to the child for things you your whole thing is to take care of the child you're overwhelmed with love and protectiveness and you know a nourishing attitude towards the child and imagine having that to god so it's a wonderful thing but see how much closer it has become and as we progress this way all the paraphernalia the power the glory the awesomeness the fearsomeness of god drops away god tries to come close to us become as ordinary and as close as possible that was the secret of the holy mother she seemed as motherly as simple as your mother back in the village a typical village mother in calcutta in the late 19th century and she was the divine mother herself so the purpose of appearing like that is to draw people closer and then the even higher than that is the madhura bhava the relationship between the lover and beloved radha and krishna and so on so all of these attitudes you see how they're bringing people closer and closer to god and the fear component drops away and the love increases so yes so fear is it might be preliminary but it's not ultimately it's not it's something that you have must overcome and move ahead in the path of bhakti and then the question he asked was about how in the stories in hinduism we find god is it's full of do's and don'ts and god is the punisher all that is very preliminary not that in those stories there's much of do's and does and god is the punisher god is the punisher is is sort of a symbolic way of saying good and bad are causal we set into motion causes and effects this is the law of karma good good bad bad and none escape the law vivekananda says this good actions lead to pleasant results um bad actions lead to unpleasant results and then um you cannot so this and these results are given by god in a theistic system we always think of god as karma dyksa as the lord of karma the one who gives the results of karma yes uh can we have one question from the do you remember your question yesterday hello thanks tell us here uh my name is raj uh i'm from chicago uh so one of my uh questions is uh very similar to the initial questions that we took and it's to do with that popular example of clay pot so now i understand that i'm this clay and that's that's the only absolute truth and that's what matters uh and uh in the form that we are currently it's it's not permanent and uh it's it's a lower plane of existence if we may call that uh now my question is how do i realize what i've turned into uh whether it's a clay pot or a sculpture or something else because to live in this in this material world or maya we have to realize um i'm sorry i'm referring to i know it's just because i want to have this sure so unless i don't know that uh how how would i perform my karma say if i'm a sculpture and not a pot then there is no point in trying to pour water into into it uh likewise if dharma is the rule of this material or maya world aren't all those rules made by the pods and not necessarily by the clay all right if i understand let me stop you right there and see if i'm understanding the question um you see that the knowledge that it is all clay does not erase the knowledge of the different parts so for example the gold and ornament example the realization that it is all gold still enables you to recognize a necklace as a necklace a bracelet is a bracelet and a ring as a ring after realizing that it is all gold you can still put the necklace on your neck and the bracelet on your wrist and the ring on your finger technically what is meant here is nama rupa viva name form and function they continue after realizing that it's a movie the actors in the movie continue to play the role the hero plays the role of the hero the villain plays the role of the villain and the card remains as a card and the street remains as history they don't start switching roles because they realize oh it's a movie we can do whatever we want no the movie still follows its own script but what you realize is that there is an underlying reality which is um the screen and what we saw seem to be the reality is an appearance these are the things that we realize similarly here what seems to be a fractured and scattered world people are different from me and there is good and bad and this this is the final reality which we are seeing we begin to see that there is an underlying reality this existence consciousness place and i am that from that perspective i can navigate my way in this world much better you have strength you have freedom you are not afraid you are not subject to delusion that this thing i must have otherwise my life is unfulfilled no no they're all appearances in you this thing this disease or this problem this old age and death terrible am i i'm ruined finished what is the point of it all no no no you are still that infinite reality so even if it comes it's not a problem the negative things the positive thing if one does not get it it's still not a problem so you can navigate your way through life in fact you can do it much better is this what you were asking uh yes uh but uh earlier uh you were mentioning about the dispassion that's that's what i think uh is kind of happening with me like knowing uh knowing this truth it's i mean i only see two options like either i'm not passionate about anything i don't want to do anything anymore or i just can do whatever i want and so it kind of seems to take uh take one to either extreme i see the question there is something that many people ask but when i begin to understand this i seem to lose passion and drive for things in the world is this right is this wrong am i making a mistake no you're right that losing the passion and drive for things in the world is a very good thing enough of the rat race there you see you must take a stand ultimately this pursuit of things in the world um is it worthwhile you must see that has it been worthwhile for me so far last 20 years of my last 40 years 50 years 60 years of my life lifetime after lifetime people have done this has it ever given fulfillment to anybody it has not therefore why should i invest so much in it that it will it is the thing my job my relationship my vacations my gadgets my hobbies these are the things which will give me fulfillment in life they won't there are only two possible outcomes of pursuing anything in the world either you will not get what you want and lead to frustration or you will get what you want and lead to a mild disappointment so what is the way out the way out is to be centered in this reality um in the realization that i am brahman and then take life as it comes to do what the beautiful verses in yoga vashisht i think after enlightenment what about work this is the enlightened one one does what has to be done done with a smile that is a much better way of living don't worry it's not that you will lose much in the world not much nothing really huge will will change in the world it will go on it is all determined by your past karma so it will keep coming good and the bad will both keep coming your fulfillment will be within see why we are worried is if i don't have passion and drive to do the things i was doing earlier we won't i lose fulfillment shankaracharya raises this question in the bhagavad-gita you'll see second chapter when arjuna asked the question what is the nature of the enlightened ones tita how do how does such a one meditate how does such a one walk talk interact with others and krishna says who gives up all desires of the heart and is so the question is raised by shankaracharya if you give up all desires but satisfaction fulfillment happiness comes in fulfillment of desires i have desires xyz and fulfill them one after another then i'm getting more and more satisfaction this seems to be the philosophy of life whether you think about it or especially if you don't think about it this is the way life goes flows so isn't this uh if you give up all the desires then what will happen to that person there will be no fulfillment there will be unhappiness the next line he says your stabilized wisdom you're centered in brahman when you are fully satisfied by the atman by the reality by existence consciousness by your own limitlessness the reason why we are unsatisfied buddhists call these hungry ghosts we are like hungry ghosts why we are unsatisfied is we feel keenly our limitedness one more thing one little more money better job better position a little more recognition a little more love in this world then i will be happy it won't be this is a hard lesson to learn nobody else ever has been look at the data in the world nobody ever has been temporarily you might be for a few hours few days few weeks that's it not more than that even the emperors have not been the nobel prize winners the superstars in hollywood and bollywood no usually it's the other way around they give the example of a crow sitting on a high building perched on the top of a tower in the windy place you know and barely hanging on who told you to sit there getting continuously blown up by the gale so that's the problem with attaining any high position there if you're looking for satisfaction from that if you're not looking you'll be perfectly comfortable on the throne and in the heart of a beggar also perfectly comfortable there have been philosopher emperors i've seen in couple of cases extraordinarily rich people heads of companies but very philosophical very calm they are they do not derive their satisfaction from their position or money or power and that's a good position to be in but notice you don't need that position power and money also to be in that position you can be perfectly all right as you are did i answer that question thank you so much very good i pray to srama krishna the holy mother swami vivekananda to bless all of us may that wisdom dawn upon us in this very life may we be centered in reality may our hearts be full of devotion um [Music] do [Music]