Video 17

18. Mandukya Upanishad | Chapter 2 Karika 1

um bhadram car innovation Aoyama diva petrm posh a moksha peerage etre steerer iran ke Stosh toboggans Astana be via Shima diva he Tejada Yahoo SWA's Pina intro British rava Suez FINA foucha Vishwa Veda swass Tina star show air Astana me SWA spin Aubry hospital data to home Shanti Shanti Shanti [Music] so in studying the mando Chiappa nishan I pointed out that the text is mundo coupon assured is embedded in a larger text called de mantequilla carica the Upanishad belongs to the vedas of course the atharvaveda but the carica was composed by goda pada whose Shankaracharya stitches teacher Carey Codd are the commentary in verse 4 now this commentary in verse form is divided into four chapters we have completed the first chapter the first chapter includes the entire mondo coupon assured no big deal because the mondo condition is very small only twelve mantras and some carica some verses composed by guru pada second chapter onwards second third and fourth chapters they are composed only of the Caritas the constituted of the Oracles of God or father the first chapter these chapters are called piranha in Sanskrit tracker on amines chapter or section chapter basically so the first chapter is called our gamma Pro karana R gamma R gamma means literally it means the Vedas but literally it means that we just come down so it has come down from just revealed by God to the Rishi's and so on so our gamma first chapter so our gamma is a part it's a revelation from God to the Rishi's who first discovered it and then it was transmitted down it has come down to us through an unbroken chain of teachers and soon come come come in come in come sit down it has reached us through an unbroken chain of teachers and students there are other texts called aagama also I mean you hear of shale agama in the shaivite tradition there are Vaishnava yamadera Tantra agamas Shakhtar gamez in the tantric tradition so there are there are other texts called arguments but here the arguments the Veda so the Vedic part of this text is the Upanishad itself so strictly speaking the opening shut itself should be called the are gamma but because demand okay opposition of 12 mantras is embedded in the first chapter the first chapter itself is called a gamma prager honor because the chapter on the Adama the argument refers to those 12 mantras in the chapter itself so I AMA Pro karana we saw that 12 mantras plus a few verses composed by guru pada now in this argument Prachanda the most important mantra of the open Ishod itself was the seventh mantra you know where we studied how the self has four aspects and the fourth aspect is called a Toria at the first three aspects being the waking dreaming and deep sleep selves the fourth aspect is the Turia the actual self the reality which is existence consciousness bliss and that was described or at least indicated in the seventh mantra in the seventh mantra do you remember the seventh mantra non-top Laguna Beach program which needed the dreamer not the Waker not the deep sleep and so on in the seventh mantra - in words are very important one word is preppin jo pochamma i poetically sometimes render it as the Silence of the universe it literally means sometimes it's translated as Christians of the universities the settling of the universe our cessation prop Anja oppa Shama cessation of the universe mystery is free from the universe strictly speaking the most direct translation will be the Toria the fourth aspect of the self is free from is without the universe prop enjoy pochamma that is one word which is very important and the next word which is very important the second word which is very important in the seventh mantra is a do item non-dual mr. iam the fourth aspect of the self so called fourth aspect of the self is non dual are do item non dual these two words are so important people still coming let them come these two words are so important that gora pada actually wrote two whole chapters the he actually wrote two whole chapters about them the second chapter is about this word prop enjoy pyjama I'm splitting it up pear opuntia pochamma this word meaning the cessation of the universe are free from the universe this word itself is taken up and the whole chapter gotta buy the rights a whole chapter on it the second chapter which we are going to start today the second chapter is called white at the ocarina broker a no means chapter so the second chapter is called white at the ocarina and it deals with one word from the seventh mantra of the Upanishads prop NGO pochamma free from the universe of the cessation of the universe basically deals with the falsity of the universe you know Advaita Vedanta proclaims Brahman alone is real the world is an appearance the world is false so what is this falsity of the universe this is what puzzles many people why does Advaita insist on the falsity of the universe what does it mean by the falsity of the universe and more important more more important is this chapter deals with can we by reasoning not just the open I should say though universes is an appearance the the self is actually free of the universe but can be by reasoning demonstrate that the universe is an appearance and not just as a revelation but by by logic by understanding can can we understand this falsity of the universe so one way of dealing with it is Upanishads said so that's fine another way of dealing with it is when you are enlightened you will see well that's also fine but now at this point not by enlightenment right now at this point with our intellect with our meager understanding can we get a grasp on what is meant by the falsity of the universe and why reason show us by logic by by reasoning that the universe is and appearance it's false so that is preppin jo parameters the word and then from there the next word used was a do item so for that go to power the wrote another chapter add weight APRA Khurana to explain the word Advaita as the third chapter but that's ahead of us and then there's a fourth chapter called a lot of shanti procore enough the the third chapter is to use reasoning to prove the non duality of the self that the ultimate reality is non dual there's no second reality apart from that to prove that the third chapter was written and the fourth chapter is basically a miscellany mainly deals with many other philosophical views and it considers what has been taught from many many angles but it's a collection of many many issues I actually the topic I'm going to speak about this Sunday no mind is drawn from the third chapter it's to come come it's two verses from the third chapter then a few weeks ago I spoke on [Music] the second chapter I a give a talk called the ultimate truth that was a verse one second chapter so I have sort of jumped ahead of what we are doing now that was just based on one verse from from this chapter very stunning verse towards the end of this chapter and then there will be the fourth chapter which is called a lot Ashanti it's a very Buddhistic term alot Ashanti la coruna quenching the firebrand or dousing the firebrand the firebrand is an example used by the Buddhists that if you take a fire by name in adroit also if you take a firebrand fired by no means like a like a glowing charcoal for example like a dot of fire light and you were lit around it looks like a continuous circle it's in it's an optical illusion it's all the time only a point of light which is moving fast so the Buddhist uses this example to show that a continuously changing stream of consciousness they do not accept one permanent unchanging consciousness can't continuously change changing continuously arising and disappearing stream of consciousness can't seem to can give the illusion of a continuous self so that's what they call it a lot a lot of chakra in fact Shankar actually also uses this example in a production over tea the whirling of the firebrand but he uses it for something else not for obviously not to prove there with this theory of the self so these are the four chapters of Manduca carica we have done the first one and now we are on the second night before I enter into the second chapter let me just dwell a little bit on this term prop enjoy pochamma made up of two words because this is what is going to be proved so what is going to be discussed let's just look at this term a little bit rapunzel means universe how does it come to mean the universe because Punja literally it means five yes it means the five elements basically the old cosmology was that the whole universe is composed of fire earth water space air all of this the five elements and in mixtures they code to compose this universe basically meaning that various combinations of matter and energy make up this universe in principle not different from modern approach physicists approach now this universe therefore is is basically the five elements in various communiques or combinations so that's what it literally means proposition means pre-christian a bunch of the five elements in various combinations that's the universe so that's like a shorthand way of describing the entire universe the five elements now in fact one old Sanskrit term for dying an old Sanskrit I'm not not so well known but it's an old sanskrit usage for dying is punch a plum gotta gone to the five he has attained the five it's a classical way of referring to death which means the physical body has decomposed into the five elements when you burn the body after death when the body is burnt the earth goes back to the earth the space joins the space itself fire to a heat to fire water to water air to air and so on so forth basically ashes to ashes dust to dust anyway so propels your efforts to the universe what what does the universe mean the universe means whatever you experience whatever we experience is the universe that's how the mandoke is this is the mandoke a framework of looking at the universe whatever you experience is the universe what do you experience you experience all of this the universe means the waking universe but you also dream about things so there is the dream universe there is the deep sleep universe what do you mean by deep sleep universe it's the way basically the waking and dream universes merged into one subject and object collapsed into one temporarily so all three are included under the term universe all three are included into the term universe another way of putting it would be by universes meant the gross universe what you see here the subtle universe dream not just dreams thoughts feelings ideas memories the the internal private first person universe each one of us has that's also universe and the causal universe the way the Manduca sees the deep sleep state as a causal state as a merged state as a potential state as a seed state seed for what waking and dreaming so breaking dreaming deep sleep means the waking universe dream universe deep sleep universe our stool sukshma karana Parappa ninja this gross subtle and causal universes including each of them includes the gross body this subtle body and the causal body these universes include this this universe for example if you were given account a description and inventory of this universe it includes this body if you give a description of the mental universe it includes the mind our mental body and the causal universe includes the causal body the anandamaya kosha all of that is propulsion oopah Shama oopah Shama literally means free off cease ceasing to be stopping cessation a more fancy English word is Cree sense quittance means silence or settling down so what they are saying is this is three of our sensation in the Turia the fourth aspect of the self it is free of there is no universe the fourth aspect of the self this pure consciousness - Liam there is no waking State there is no waking universe dream universe or causal universe it is free of the universe and the fourth aspect is what you really are so what you really are is free of the universe this word basically the opossum Amin's negation of the universe in sanskrit Nishida this term proppant japa Shama together it means negation or Nishida a denial of the reality of the universe a denial of the reality of the universe now you can see where why this chapter is about the falsity of the universe repent oppa Shama literally means a denial of the reality of the universe a question arises here what is it that is being denied or even better what can be denied what is it that you can deny what do you what is it that you negate what is you that you can say that it does it is not let me break down the question little further can you negate what exists or can you negate what does not exist what is there but I'm saying in a very simple way negative means it's not there it's not now if something is there can you say that it's not there it'll be a false statement it cannot be negated what exists cannot be negated and what does not exist need not be negated you see if it doesn't exist at all if there's nothing like that who why would you be bothered about negating it a square circle why would you break your head about saying that there are no square circles it's a no consequence it's not there it's not troubling you anyway so what exists cannot be negated cannot be denied it'll be--it'll be lie to say that it doesn't exist and what does not exist need not be negated then the only thing that can be negated is something which is which cannot be said to either exist or not exist how strange is that what do you mean the only thing that can be negated only thing that is a fit subject see the second chapter is actually tougher than the first one from now on the going gets tough 2nd 3rd 4th chapters because now they are going to move like the katha upanishad says on the razor's edge which you have to be razor sharp to follow what God apart is going to do these are some of the there are some really sharp cookies so you have to be very careful it follow really close to them step by step he is going to take us into some very deep waters indeed before realization before enlightenment is going to make this entire universe disappear before your eyes by the end of this chapter you think you'll be really scared as you go through this chapter yeah he's going to absolute raise the difference between dreams and waking just erase the difference so and it starts here so what can be denied what can be negated is something is clearly not something the truth cannot be denied and completely non-existence cannot be denied it's like what do you prove to be false when you say if somebody told the truth you can't prove it to be false because it's the truth if somebody keeps silent you can't prove anything to be false you didn't say anything it's only when somebody tells a lie that you can prove it to be false correct only lies can be proved to be false yes okay we're coming there you're in direct line with you in your channeling your inner guru Pathik what she said was in that case what can be negated and what we are going to negate is something that does not exist and yet appears to exist good again the inner God our Father then the very next thing I was going to give it a barrage of examples all right not as you what a strange thing it does not exist but appears to exist do we know of any such thing its world is full of such things world is full of such things for example the classic Advaitic example of the rope snake where the Rope appears to be a snake and at that moment you are perfectly perfectly convinced it's a snake it even scared you now that needs correction it's an error it's an error right it needs correction what you see there by mistake by entirely by your mistake it will be good to correct it that correction is this OPA shaman negation he's speaking about you make an error and that is corrected you see something that is not there you're seeing a snake which is not there there may be snakes in the zoo but it's not there it's a rope water in the Mirage so swami vivekananda the famous Tony's going in the desert in Rajasthan and he sees water he's very thirsty and he goes to drink the water and he sees it's a mirage not only that at least the snake in the rope disappears when you see it you realize it's not there but Mirage water when he walks further and he looks back he sees water but what has happened in between what has happened in between is though he sees it oopah Shama has happened it has cease to be water so the Mirage water is he knows it now it has been corrected it has been denied it has been negated that water in the Mirage has been negated now though it continues to appear appearance cannot be stopped it's a matter of optics optical illusion it cannot be stopped but what can be stopped is the wrong idea that there is water there there is no water there what is not there appears to be there that is the essence of error Shankar Acharya in the in his famous Rd ah sabasha he says he says the the essence of error he at the Messiah he calls it that which is not there when it appears to be there that is the essence of error I forget the exact sanskrit very nice short pithy term no easier than that okay he says I'll come back so negation means you are negating something which is not there but appears to be there the water in a mirage dreams what happens when you wake up oh it was a dream unless you are Janaka the King Janaka where you go into philosophical tangles but otherwise when you wake up you say oh I was dreaming I was safe and safe and sound in my bed all that was I saw that those people those places those events they are all not there though I saw them when you wake up from dream you don't say I did not see a dream you say I saw it but it was a dream it was a dream means it did not happen really so this is the denial of something which appears but is not there yes yes no no if it if it is not an error it exists and what is what you are right you pointed out something important what she said is every error must have a basis of reality if you are saying something is a lie then below it must be truth if you say this currency is forged it's a good example it's a four it's a forgery it's not a real dollar bill or a rupee bill that means there must be some real currency to compare it with your all currencies cannot be forged only because there's something real you are saying compared to that this is false now she says that every error must have a basis in truth it is the truth misrepresented misunderstood misperceive which you call an error okay this is what adroit is saying basically if there is an error there must be truth behind it the very fact that the world is called an error in advaitha we'll see we are not proved it that's what's that's the whole subject matter of second chapter this word is called an error our perception universe is going to be negated it's called an error means that there is a truth behind it not an unconnected truth does the at the basis of this error there must be truth at the basis of the false snake there must be the real rope at the basis of the blue sky there must be the colorless sky the real sky without any color so Brahman the reality is here and now and this itself misperceived as this world that's an important point in fact this just a little bit out of the way but it's Shankar Acharya uses this language in the brahma sutra basha where he takes up different schools of thought for refutation so when he comes to the buddhist school of he refutes other Buddhist schools there are many Buddhist schools he refutes other Buddhist schools in detail we ghana vadas the school of for momentary consciousness he refutes in detailed page after page but when he comes to Xiu Nevada the school of the void Shankar Acharya refutes it in one sentence not because it can be it's easy to refute in one sentence but because he seems to be strangely sidestepping the issue he just says began owada ever misciagna vada the school of the void that ultimately everything is shown iam Shankar Acharya refutes it by just just saying one sentence that we do not accept error without truth now I am nirahara Brahma Hongik or maha literal it means we do not accept and error without bottom like a bottomless well it can't be a bottomless well a well no matter how deep it's not going to go through the earth and come out on the other side at one point it comes to a ground so the bottom of this error of this universe is Brahman it's the ground on which this thing appears it's the rope on which the snake of the universe appears he dismisses it and scholars have caught that you see they have said that actually the the mugdha maker school the school of Xu Nevada is so close to Advaita Vedanta that he dare not examine it too closely because then the game will be up because if you try to refute it too closely and examine it too closely you will reveal your own philosophy basically and they are the same almost the same it seems to be from one point of view and also just to be fair the school of Shunyata that does not say that it's all error that's often both the Hindus and the Buddhists have sort of misrepresented or caricatured each each other's point of view to refute it but if you examine shown a bother deeply enough and if you examine Advaita deeply enough the parallels become very clear they're not saying exactly the same thing but they are saying almost like mirror images all right but back to our prop enjoy Kshama now we said something rather stunning what you can deny is not the truth because you cannot deny the truth what exists cannot be denied what exists in Vedanta is called sucked that which is SAP that which does not exist at all the classic in classical Sanskrit examples they give is car push / sky flower a flower in the sky or they say the Bunya put through the son of a barren woman by logic by definition itself there can be no Sun either then the woman is a mother or the Sun cannot exist so these are examples of asset not existing at all so neither such can be denied nor Assad Assad need not be denied what can be denied is neither the existent nor the non-existent is something apart from the existent and the non-existent in sanskrit sud acid beyond an aversion IAM that which cannot be designated as such or assert this is the definition of the term mid-tier in sanskrit this is mithya always and we say brahma satyam jagat mithya brahman is real and and the world is false that's English translation the precise Sanskrit word is mithya note that it does not say the world does not exist it does not say the world does not exist it says the world is mithya what is mithya that which cannot be said to exist or not to exist why Cannot may it be said to exist because of upon realization or when you study the Upanishads or when we shall see by reasoning in this chapter we shall see it really does not exist but why can you not say that it does not exist because it appears it is experienced we are dealing with it all the time we are living in it so our entire waking universe and dream universe and deep sleep that merge darkness of deep sleep all of it is eeeh this is the proposition what we are going to deal with in this subchapter mithya neither existent in fact Vedanta says the only thing that really exists is to rear the fourth the Brahman the ultimate reality the absolute that's the only thing that exists nor is it entirely non-existent because it appears so all of them the gross universe the subtle universe and the causal universe including the gross body the subtle body and the causal body all of it stars and planets protons and neutrons human beings and whales and dolphins and all of this and all of what you dream about all of it is is mithya and appearance there is a truth there there's a grounding of true death that which appears in this way the truth is Turia or Brahman and the appearance is the world that's what they're trying to say this can be negated this can be negated this is that is the premise that is what the promises we are going to show you how it can be negated negation of a snake seen in a rope is easy to understand negation of a water of water in the Mirage is easy to understand negation of an optical illusion like I say the blue color in the sky is easy to understand even dreams you wake up and you see how it is negated what is meant by negation of this world how to prove this to be mithya one is already open Ishod has said it now by reasoning we are going to by logic we are going to see this what else did I want to say okay if this is mithya now what she said that there must be a ground of truth to it what is the truth remember what has been called mithya waker dreamer deep sleeper whicker's universe dreamers universe deep sleepers universe all our media then what is the truth Toria the first one is the truth one two three fourth one is truth to reham what it is saying is what's happening oh okay fine come come come China's just give them some space to sit yeah you can come here to come up here there's a lot of space here you've got some premium seating here the fourth is the truth turian is the truth the one two three the four the three powders the three aspects of the self the waking aspect the waking self dream self and deep sleep self and the respective universes they are not the truth they are appearance the fourth alone is the truth if one two three are not real their appearances and the fourth alone is reality then the fourth becomes non dual fourth becomes non dual why non dual because there is no second thing apart from thee from the fourth I've apart from deuterium there is no second thing apart from the Turia what was the what is the possibility waking dreaming deep sleep but they are not real that's the that's the that's the proposition we are going to show that if they are not real then the terrarium becomes without a second without a second in Sanskrit add weight of non-dual are you with me so far the Torian becomes non the wiset or iam non dual I didn't I just say four aspects of the self there is a physical universe there is a subtle universe there is a causal universe no if they are neither real non non unreal they cannot be counted with the real you cannot count the media with the Satyam you cannot count the appearance with the reality you win the lottery and you are happily counting the dollar bills and suddenly you wake up now what you counted in your dream with thousands of dollars you've stacked nicely when you wake up you cannot add it to your existing wealth that so much I counted so much and now I can go on you like to cookie and ate a cookie and then you in a dream you ate three more and even wake up next to you said I have overdosed on sugar right four cookies no luckily you cannot count the three dream cookies with the cookie you ate before going to sleep so the the real thing cannot be counted along with the with the with the dream dream entities whatever you dreamt about so all of these should not be counted with Torian if these cannot be counted with Tory em then thorium becomes one and yet they appear follow this carefully yet they appear so what appears and yet cannot be counted separately from Torian the only thing you can say is a do item not to the true liam is the reality the Turia is the reality and all of these they are not real they appear if they appear on and are not real the only thing you can say is they must be in some sense the thorium itself they are not apart from it they are not separate entities from it so not to it's like if that sounds too abstract very simple way of understanding no our classic gold and ornament example imagine the bracelet is the waking the necklace is the dream the ring is the the deep sleep and gold is the trium now the three ornaments are not apart from the gold right from the point of view of the gold can you count one ornament two ornament three horns and gold is the fourth ornament can you count no you cannot count you cannot count if you're counting ornaments how many are there three if you are counting the substance itself how many are there only a few seem to be one only there's only one what is that one gold then let me ask you the question what about those three ornaments with respect to the gold what are they non-dual they are not second other than gold other than gold you cannot say gold plus one more thing called necklace gold plus the second thing called ring no you have to see gold itself why can you not count them apart from the gold because you cannot show them apart from the gold podium the wood and the podium wood and the podium can I say that there are two things here I use towards wood and podium so can I say there are two things here no use only because I cannot show them separately so the podium is Nandu with is not a second thing apart from the would similarly ornaments are not second is not a second thing apart from gold similarly the entire universe which we experience is not a second thing apart from thorium therefore Turia miz ad litem the universe is not a datum Turia miz ad vitam the ornaments are not non-dual the three kinds of ornaments or many kinds of ornaments but gold is non dual with respect to all those ornaments terrarium is non dual with respect to everything that we experience gross universe subtle universe deep sleep universe not only that the cells which we experience in waking the making self dream self deep sleep cell they are also known they are also not a second one apart from the tour IAM the real self there is a little contradiction here what is the contradiction it could say so I mean look at the language you are using you are you you're saying the tedium is non dual not two but literally the word to diem means number four you're saying remember four is not two how can it be number four if there is no - you can say it is one and not two a come a word with iam it is one and without a second that's the classic Advaitic exam but if you sing four is without a second it must have been one and two and three and then only four so how are you saying the fourth one is without a second do you see the contradiction you're saying - Liam is fourth why is it fourth because we have shot ourselves in the foot we started with four aspects of the self and the fourth aspect is the thorium now you are going you're saying the fourth one is without a second how can it be fourth just for the way somebody raises such a question how can you call it fourth if there is no one to three how can you yes remember again back to the seventh month of the Upanishad your totem money on day it says it is thought to be the fourth and the commentator says thought by whom AG yaha the ignorant think of it as the fourth when you when we are studying Vedanta we are accustomed to the waking self that guy who is studying Vedanta is the reeking self also we know our dream selves we also can sort of conceive of our deep sleep self and in respect to these three we are we are trying to find out what the Punisher is pointing at the fourth aspect that is called the fourth with respect to one two three but now the one two three are proved to be not separate realities they are all appearances of that fourth so there is no one two three just as you cannot crown count the dream cookies you cannot count the dream money you cannot count one two three if you are going to count reality you have to count only two them if you are going to count the experienced selves you can count waking dreaming and deep sleep but just like the ornaments when you count gold you cannot count the three ornaments anymore because three hundreds are made of that gold right are you with me why it is not called why fourth is not really for it's the only one those who are enlightened meaning you you become those of completed first chapter you know fourth doesn't mean fourth when people are new newbies are coming you can say that wait for it Forte's fourth oh yeah only for you guys better beware once you finish it there is no force there is only one without a second turian without any second a Khmer word with you man that's the language used in chandogya upanishad a Khmer was with iam one only without a second one only without a second three terms are used there is a meaning to that so these three are appearances the reality is torreón this to diem is in and through all of them just like the Rope is where is the rope in and through the snake where is the Mirage where you see the water itself yeah now nothing has been proved so far this thing is what the open assured wants us to understand now God Apophis says I can show it to you through reasoning Shankaracharya also he gives a commentary there when he starts the second chapter he says what we learned about the appearance of the universe a gamma Mottram tuk thesis that is that is the revelation of the that is opener itself europa nation but what about reasoning what about knowledge what about understanding it can be understand it one way I have seen senior monks and tell us alright let it be right now when you realize it you will see ok well but what about now can we understand it Gordo father says yes we have to reason about it before we get into the reasoning all right before we start reasoning let me talk about reasoning a little bit what is meant we keep talking about logic and reason but there is a very precise meaning of logic and reason when they talk about it I'll give you a very quick idea of it before we start so this a one more point here so proppant Joe pochamma the free from the universe negation of the universe that's the topic here proppant yokohama another meaning another name for that is mithya falsity falsity of what falsity of the universe so falsity of the universe is the topic another term for falsity is we tada that's where the chapter gets its name ritika literally means data means like that as such and we tota means not as such not not what it looks to be data means it is what it looks to be batata means it's not what it seems to be that is the meaning of falsity it's not what it that's how ad vitam when Advaita says world is false it means that that it's not what it seems to be V theta V theta means unreal not not what it seems to be and white atiim the name of the chapter is the now V theta is the adjective why the term is the noun is the is the unreality so unreal unreality the chapter on unreality remember the chapter is not unreal it's a chapter it is about the unreality of the universe Mattia mithya means false the chapter is not false it's about the falsity of the universe all right now a little fast very fast tutorial on reasoning on logic so many of you might know those who have been trained in logic for them it is nothing but many of you might know that there is a subject called logic and there is a whole science to it and these days especially it's a very sophisticated subject and it basically forms the very basis of our whole I teach computer science and everything but it's an ancient subject prevalent in both the east and the West in the West the basis is what is called Aristotle and logic Greek logic long before I became a monk I had a I had this subject back in school logic so we learned a lot about Aristotle and logic and Greek logic which is that the basis of Western logic of course modern logic is very sophisticated it's called mathematical logic symbolic logic which developed in the 18th 19th centuries or not it's really sophisticated it's the basis of all our computer science information science or now there is also Indian logic the science of reasoning in Indian philosophy which is called knee iya so today knee ayah the eye Amin's the ayah is a branch of philosophy and this philosophy is they are specialists in reasoning in the ayah the practitioners of kneei are called naiyayikas so you will know it when you meet one they'll argue you to the death they'll dispute anything and everything but they develop the science of logic in India in the ayah so we like our philosophy is called Vedanta and practitioners are called Vedanti now we use nya every school of philosophy in India whether they're Buddhists are Yogi's or sanctions or vedantins or poolroom or any of the schools they all borrow on the techniques developed by nyah nyah has its own conclusions nyah if you look at the nya philosophy I had the occasion to study it when we had trained to be monks that's one of the Colossus of his we study as at an introductory level but I had the chance to study it under a good teacher a pundit of Naya I took three advanced courses in the ayah why did I mention that okay the conclusions of kneei of philosophy apart from the techniques of logic the conclusions of jnana philosophy are very different from Vedanta they're very different in fact they are much closer to common sense they don't say world is false they say what is very real they don't say this one reality they say there in fact there are many realities they are much closer to I would say a common-sense view of reality or even a modern materialist scientific view of reality the ayah of a shaker understood is by shaker so these people they use logic now let me give you the basic form of argument that's all we need to know we are not going to study in the IEEE ahead but we're just going to know that how the naiyayikas argue because then you will know what go to pada pada pada also uses the nya form of argument in fact everybody in ancient India did although they were like mortal enemies of the nya occurs not dwellings Buddhist they're all enemies philosophically speaking of naiyaikas but they use the techniques they use those resources so what is the basic way deny I cuss argue to understand that I'll give you two in comparison the basic way they say Aristotle in logic works and then compare it with the Naya logic very simple way the classic syllogism the fourth syllogism is a form of argument classic syllogism interested Aristotle and logic is all men are mortal is the example we have to learn all men are mortal Socrates is a man and so Socrates is mortal so this is a logic all men are mortal statement one and there are technical names for the major premise and minor premise and conclusion Socrates is a man so these two are given to you from reasoning from these two what is the conclusion that you will reach the conclusion that you reach is therefore tell me Socrates is mortal this is called a syllogism in aristotle and logic and there are many many forms of the syllogism I think there are 14 or 15 forms of the basic syllogism which we will memorize when we were kids I've forgotten they're all interesting names like Barbara and seller and and Damaris I still remember some of them they have been yeah no that's our most basic way of proving that this everything depends on thinking the conscious self yeah yeah yeah that all that comes later that yeah that's the form you're talking yeah now this is the and this is logic 101 this is what you learn will forget a Vedanta or even advanced philosophy if we go to a logic class this is the example they will use they will not use icing therefore I am because that's actually not so basic that's a pretty sophisticated conclusion that Descartes reach it's not something that they can teach schoolchildren because the whole whole yeah so it's a conclusion which Descartes reached up in his project of doubting everything and he ended up by saying that I cannot doubt my own existence because after all the always doing the doubting if I if I deny myself the cogito ergo sum of descartes but this is the example which is used to teach kids logic and then you go on into various kinds of forms of this their different forms of this then there are fallacies there are there are there are a lot of a lot of lot of fallacies are there different kinds of fallacies and you find them in the dialogues of Socrates so it's very old more than 2,000 years old in Greek logic so this is the form now what is the Indian form of this similar but very interestingly different also and then I will tie it up by showing why I am saying this in this context this gives you basically the whole strategy of God upon that what is going to do what is the Indian form again the basic form which we were taught as students of logic in Sanskrit it goes this way pervert oven Ahmad pervert oven naman Duma at wat Auto Mart yes yep tray at Rideau Mahuta traductor when he yatama hana say what does it mean there is fire on the hill because there is smoke wherever there is smoke there is fire and you should that sounds familiar hood yeah that's the phrase in English too wherever there is smoke there is fire as in the kitchen now here is the difference between in a Western logic and Indian logic in Indian logic the way you do it is first there is something to be proved you have to ask what do you want to prove what we want to prove fire where do you want to prove it want to prove it on the hill there's fire on the hill then you transfer why by what reason what reason are you giving to say that there is fire on the hill how will you prove it smoke there is smoke how do you know they smoke you sight so you know but I can see the fire also in that case you don't have to prove it you've seen it see proving this is called inferential knowledge not perceptual knowledge if you have perceptual knowledge the principle is you don't have to use inference right it's like if you assign when you come in here and if you sign it on a sheet when you come in here and I can see you there let me see let me find out whether you are here or not will I say I see you therefore you are here or will I go to the register and see your name is there though you must be here no I have seen you so I don't have to infer from some other data that you are here if you see the fire you don't have to prove it it already your sensors have shown revealed it to you but if you do not see it then you have to prove it this is the basic method which is used in science when you collect data lot of the things that you talk about in science are not visible to the senses you can't see it smell it hear it taste it touch it but you have extraordinary instruments powerful instruments which can detect the extraordinarily tiny and extraordinarily vast also or the distant ones and based on the data you make an inference you already have a hypothesis then you make an inference which can prove or disprove your hypothesis but basically inferential knowledge is like this so you want to use you have to say because of the smoke I see the smoke therefore there is fire and then one more question you ask which is peculiar to Indian logic you have to ask like what give an example say like the kitchen or the stove or something what is this like what where have you seen this phenomenon earlier but you say wherever there is smoke there is fire where have you seen it how do you know well wherever there is smoke this but you must have seen it you must have seen both of them together sometime at least to establish that link that link is vital it's called B opti the link between what and why fire and smoke that link is vital you see the whole system will not work without without that link there is fire on the hill see there is fire where on the hill why how do you know because I see smoke what's the relation wherever there is smoke there is fire how do you know because I saw it in the kitchen I saw both of them together that's how this works let me give you the Sanskrit what you want to prove is called saadia subject where you want to prove it is called parsha you can't say it's like the fire fire station here if they see a smoke coming out from an apartment here on the 70s second it happened a few weeks ago the smoke pouring out from an apartment in this 72nd Street so there's a smoke there and therefore there must be fire but where I can't rush up to the 88th Street because I saw smoke on the 72nd Street we have to go there where if the smoke is coming out I am proving that there is fire in that apartment on the 72nd Street so there is an important word there is an important term why why do you say there is fire because you're seeing smoke so this is called Hey - Hey - means cause reason why and then example drish tanta - tanta means example so these are the components of the Indian syllogism and it's very similar to the Greek syllogism and they are about contemporary little in the Indian system might be a little older it's called Gautama Zi sutras like in Vedanta Brahma sutras are there in the ayah also there in fact many people do not know because it's only academic now pundits and scholars study it many people do not know the literature on the ayah is actually larger than the literature on Vedanta there are more say for example the introductory text we study when we start Vedanta is called Vedanta saara introductory text we study is called Vedanta SAR it has three well-known commentaries and a few other not so well-known having three well-known commentaries to my knowledge Bipin see the tradition is there is a text and there are sub commentaries just like this one which we are studying the original text is Mundaka Upanishad commentary on that mandu cake Erica commentary on that shankara's come in tree and there are sub commentaries also like that so a standard text to and learn where Dante's vedantis are and it has three commentaries which shows how much it has been studied and commented upon the standard text to learn the ayah is called Turkish Angora literally it means a collection of arguments so you can know what the tendency of those people to my knowledge I have a list of eight T commentary's 8-0 commentaries with written on it in Sanskrit on that one simple introductory text it shows the how much these people they how much they argued I have one of my teachers Vedanta teachers a monk he was also trained in the ayah he's not argumentative he's the sweetest man you can imagine but he has this funny sayings you know for example doctrine deny cos until attract a cop in or something which means where where the logicians recite even crows cannot stay there the crows you know they are always cackling and corrupt cawing and all and the logicians put them to shame because the quarrel so much that the crows fly of it I give up I can't stay with these guys and they're all the time their coddling an example it's funny that's well tell you you know when we start these texts we do a chant so we do a chant and logicians being logicians in even in their text when they started as a chant but being logicians didn't do the chant the first thing is why and so I just do a chant it's nice no why why do a chant why should we not start it without doing a chant and then see the answer you see how it how they argue the answer is that traditionally the chant is done because to to to two purposes one is to remove all obstacles and one is for the successful completion of the text so to remove all obstacles for the successful completion of the text the author does it so that daughter can finish the text the text can do well it can be a best-seller or whatnot they didn't have New York Times list in those days but some some text became more popular than others and the student does it so that we can finish studying god knows if we shouldn't die before the text is completed so successful completion of the text overcoming all obstacles that's the purpose of the chant you pray to God the NAIC I won't let you go so easily I'll say but there are so many texts which were successfully completed and there are no chance associated with them so many people write books there's no chance there and there are so many texts which there are in the museum's you see manuscripts which begin with a nice chant but the text was never completed so your argument that to tell the chant helps you to complete the text that is falsified in both ways there are complete texts without chance and there are texts with nice chants are not completed then the answer to that will be all this is of no use but I'm just showing a demo what happens the answer to that will be that the texts which have chance but were not completed they had many obstacles in the past karma so they should have chanted more and the texts which were completed without any chant well they had chanted in the past lives in the door of chanting so the effects are there in the present life this goes on and at one point this line of reasoning is abundant but they come to useful conclusions you know and there's this whole list called Mangala which are an analysis of the chanting at the beginning what conclusion do they finally come to the conclusion they finally come to is wonderful it's really common sense and really worthwhile you know what conclusion they come to we chant because it's the cultural thing to do it's good it's good form part of good culture to chant at the beginning of a class that's why we do it even then they won't let go so then chant it in your mind why loudly so because so that the next generation of students can also learn it that's why it's done loudly that's the final conclusion they have so this is how they go on just one more point here before I go ahead the unique thing about the Indian form the knee I affirm is the dish tanta this example this is not there in the Greek form now this has two consequences one bad and one good logicians have argued modern logicians and mathematicians have argued that this will make sense to those who study mathematics and logic that at one time Greek logic became in the West a basis for development of mathematical logic of higher order logics an argument about an argument a syllogism about a Sailaja second-order logic 3rd order logic but you could not do that so easily in the ayah because this is rooted to the world you must show me an example in the world so if you try to make an abstract argument about this this becomes a little difficult then you have to use and on that argument as an example so the problem was that this form of argumentation prevented the development of higher order logic in India that's one argument how far it's true we don't know but the advantages one interesting thing I saw recent some recent development and logic is that they found a use for it in robotics what happens is abstract logic it seems doesn't work for a machine which has to deal with the real world the machine helps it works but it works on a heuristic principle I sort of make mistakes and learn principle so if you can program it with lot of real-world examples this is so because of that just like such and such thing so it will keep its logic sinking will be routed to the world to the environment it's connected to the environments its reasoning is connected to the environment so just thinking something developed 3000 years ago where the couldn't haven't thought about mesh robots is finding its use in today's world yeah yes a whole artificial-intelligence here we are finding this this approach much more useful anyway now let's apply to Vedanta all this is just my preparation so the NAIC has developed a whole system of logic it's a vast system very interesting very complicated very sophisticated before the development of modern mathematical logic it was the most intricate system so I'm you reckon Allah says in the complete works the most integrated sophisticated system of and paraphrasing of reasoning ever developed by mankind is in the ancient Indian system of logic now we apply to to Vedanta what is God about the doing what does he want to prove falsity right makiato falsity we're the waking world specifically the universe I mean in general the universe but what we are interested in is the waking world what do we consider to be real this one we are really not bothered about the what the dream world because we know it we all accept it's a dream but this world is false the waking world he wants to prove that there is falsity here this is false why this is the whole chapter it will come slowly if we come into fifth or sixth words why what is the reason and like what like what so dream yes grandfather will use the dream example an example is something that everybody should agree upon I want to prove that there is fire on the hill because there is smoke now this will work for you only if you agree that wherever there is smoke there is fire so I want to give you an example where we both agree that we have seen smoke and fire so I said just like a like the kitchen where we saw smoke and air but it will not be modern Indian kitchen where smoke less Chula will be there remember wherever there is smoke there is fire the opposite is not true have to be that's my logic you have to be very careful wherever there is fire the smoke no no no there are examples like in your same cooking range for example smokeless and in India they are making stoves because the village stoves which people use for cooking already unhealthy they generate a lot of smoke so smokeless Chula they call it oven smokeless ovens now you have fire there but no smoke so fire and smoke do not go together always but smoke and fire go together all this smoke is generated by fire so if we are agreed on the example in the kitchen which we saw smoke and fire together now we are seeing smoke coming from that apartment or that Hill therefore can be agree that there is there must be fire there though we can't see it now we have to raise out there with a fire fire engine and all of that just like that what is an example we will agree on we will agree on the dream example the dreams are what we saw in dreams are for if you agree then grown apart is going to prove that just like a dream this waking world is also false what is he going to prove what falsity like fire we're waking world like the hill like what kitchen here dream what is the reason that is the crucial thing I'm not sure I put a blank here why is it false so that is the thing to be understood which we will go into in the next few verses now this will work this like it will work only if you agree on this this example there always will be a guy who will say that but dreams are also true sometimes so that's why I go to power the starts his second chapter because he's going to use the dream example to prove something dramatic that this waking world is also like a dream it's also an appearances also mithya false before that he wants to make sure we are all on the same page so he is going to spend a couple of verses in the beginning to show that dreams are false you might say yeah I agree dreams are false go ahead he said no no no not so fast one reason is there might be some peculiar guy obstinate guy would say no dreams are true we have to make provision for that we have to convince that guy and the second thing is even all of us we agree dreams are false but we have not thought it through philosophically be accepted dreams are false but why if you are pushed into a cardinal tell me why dreams are false please enumerate the reasons why do you think dreams are false so we must move in philosophy small steps but steady steps build up a case so the first two verses will be three verses will be he will argue you might say it's a fruitless argument we accept the premise that dreams are false but let's just see why dreams are false so let's start so this was an introduction to the second chapter what is going to happen and the inner working this is the procedure that is going to follow this is the I can say the DNA of the creature which is in front of you now so this this is he's going to generate the reason this one this is the chapter of course later on he will give some spiritual advice also so if the world is false and you understand it now what does it mean for your spiritual life those things also will come but first this one the main substance of the chapter is that why is the world false first of all because it's like a dream dream is false how first verse vitae am sorry Baba Varnum wait I am sorry Baba Sapna harmony Sheena Manisha Naha aunt Astana - baba nam aunt Astana - brahmana sangrita twin hey tuna some Britta twin hey tuna so we are taking up the dream first why are we taking up the dream example first because he's going to use that as an example in his new ayah syllogism the argument which is building up to show that the waking world is also an appearance like a dream now in the dreams in Sapna Sapna means in the dream all things are said to be false everything that you experience in the dream the people you meet the things that happen the places you see even your own self which you see in the dream the guy walking around in the dream you saw yourself and all that is false it is that understood by the wise to be false why because he says because it's within the body within the body because of the limited space within the body it very simple reason but you see he will give reasons of time and space and causation which show that the dream cannot be true at least not in the same sense it's this waking is true so one is that space an argument from space what does he mean Sara Bob Havana means all entities which entities Sapna in dream so the people you see when all of that everything that happens in the events also they're all false why understand art because they are all inside inside what inside your physical body in fact the yoga psychology says that how do dreams happen they say that the Jeeva you the entity when you dream there is some nadi there are some nerves in which you exist and you move in that area your you will contract yourself to a certain nerve or system of nerves that was the understanding so all that is happening in the dream the places you're going to people you're interacting with all is within the tiny sensitive system of neurons and Shankaracharya makes it more clear he said the hills you see in the dream and the elephants that you see in the tree here in Manhattan you might not generally see elephants in Hilton but the buses and the subway and all of that which you see they are too large to be in the body and what see what is the argument the argument is when you wake up you realize it was all in my head I was here in the bed and never stirred out of the bed all of this was simulated virtual reality in this head now what did I see I saw buses and people and trees and huge apartment Empire State Building all of it in this space so in this space it must have been a simulation it must have been imagination it must have been a construct the actual things could not have been here because this place is even if I am completely brainless still there is not enough space for fitting in the Empire State Building in here so this place is not enough there is a dissonance of space later on he will bring in time and causation also I mean he says that not only this physical space actually the dream is taking place in a tiny system of nerves noddy's Sankara sorry we'll make out but God a father says in any case the dream happened in the body all the things which happened you did not walk out with the body and go into the Empire State Building rather you were here in the body the entire thing was imagined since those huge things could not fit into this physical body so what you saw will not be actual things which you which are experienced in the waking state hence it's not real do you follow the logic simple thing is space does not match space requirements do not match you couldn't have fitted Manhattan into your head inside this and the simulation definitely happened in here because you did not actually go out all those things also will be taken up in the next verse he will say that suppose somebody says no I actually went there and he came back and I got into the bed I sleep walked or something so I saw it there no because it will give examples if you are woken up you will not wake up in the middle of the Empire State Building at night you wake up in your bed so you did not actually go there if you met somebody and you go and ask though last night I met you you know why I didn't even see you so none of those things actually happened in the waking world therefore it is correct that it did not happen it's not real it's all in your head because it's all in your head so it is false because it's inside ant astana means inside but remember they will not let go as so easily they will object every little thing has to be clarified being inside is not a reason for being false and it gives an exact the Shankar Acharya says suppose somebody says being inside is not see you have to argue like this absolutely precisely why you say objects seen in a dream or false why because they are inside then somebody will argue all the people in this room are false why they're inside the room just being inside is not enough something is inside something else so we are inside the building so are we false No so you have to add the further thing some little train because of inconsistency in space just because you're inside inside is perfectly all right if I say human beings are inside this building you can't say it is a false statement but if I say the Empire State Building is inside this room you'll say it's not it's not consistent because space is not consistent so like this entirety of the figure a dreamworld was experienced inside and the space is not consistent inside means inside the nervous system space is not consistent so it was imagined or dreamt you say the dreams are false I know before this now you're confusing me without all this reasoning I knew the dreams were false now with all this reasoning I'm getting doubts yeah somebody said I remember a long time ago the Swami was in a Singapore he told us something funny he said when he came to the training centre for monks in balloon mutt he was studying and he went to Swami Nirvana and the vice-president of the order at that time and the Swami asked him so how are your studies going and this Ramachari novice said oh I had firm faith in God before studying all the scriptures now I'm not so shocked when I just after studying all this logic and reasoning and everything now I'm beginning to doubt the whole thing and I is just joking but anyway so this is the reason why this is done is because say for example this some people definitely ask this question I had myself faced it they'll say but dreams are sometimes true have you heard this statement dreams are sometimes true remember we are doing philosophy here we are in the company of the NAIC us you have to be very precise when you make statements dreams are sometimes true what do you mean when you say dreams are sometimes true it means something you saw in a dream happened in the waking State and therefore it is true not that what happened in the dream is true in itself it was reflected in the waking State some event in the waking State you dreamt of somebody and you met somebody next day oh the dream turned out to be true dream turned out to true in a predictive sense it happened in the waking state suppose you are not met that person in the waking state you had met that person in your dreams you wouldn't say it is true so dreams by themselves are not true that much is clear I story about Swami Nirvana under which I've told earlier I'll say that and end today I've already shared it the story very interesting I heard it long time back when I became a novice very interesting story so I mean nirananda it was a vice-president of the order he was a save arc of Swami brahmananda the spiritual son of Sri Ramakrishna the first president of the order Swami Ramananda now need 100 the G was I have seen him when I was a little kid I still remember him he was a mystic he given two visions and all of that before Swami Brahman and the passed away it's there in the eternal companion life story of so I'm from Holland before he passed away you'll see at the end it's there he blessed everybody one of his civics assistants who served him a young monk came to him towards the end of his life toward the end of Rama and his life and Ramananda said to him you will attain Bramha Gyan as realization of brahman in this very life I bless you that you will attain Bramha Gyan you will be enlightened in this very life that young monk was Nirvana Nanda and later people asked him so it was predicted we read it's published now that is really do you'll be enlightened sorry I'd like to have a tantrum again and he said yes and and at that time the monks wanted to keep this in recording so that slipped a tape recorder I know one of those old tape recorders under the bed and I heard the recording actually recording No so he's saying yes and they asked him what so what do you see he said I see everything so we had to sort of sheepishly take the tape recorder and he was a it was a very very strange and incredibly incredible level old Swami he told me some things which are personal I was a little kid I was just seven or eight years old but it turned out to be true incredibly - afterwards thirty years later and I think the amazing things I remembered them I mean I don't remember anything else at that time I remember him my parents had taken me to him bow down to him and you're sitting there in balloon but the room next to Swami Vivekananda's room and he had this huge piercing eyes you know he would like putting you through a cat scanner he'd look you up and down so the story goes like this when he was the vice president and very elderly so I mean everyone on the one day the his assistant the one who was serving him was about 2:00 in the morning was about to wake him up open the curtains at in the morning and said Swami wake up you're late and this Swami's got up and said oh you know last night Swami Brahma Honda came to me dream Swami Brahma Han and his guru came to me and said should gee he's to call him Shuji because his name was should jimana should you should you have you been to japan and i said no all right let's go to japan and he took me to japan see it's a dream he's describing a dream and then we went to this huge shopping place in those days India I didn't have shopping malls and then we went inside and he said Shoji what do you want I said I don't want anything but you take something and then I saw this nice pair of slippers sandals and I selected it and I got it and brought it back here and the assistant the say work said now Swami you are cut beware of this and will show me well see if it's see if the dream is real then you should have the sandals to show right you brought back the sandals so where are the sandals where is the thing that you bought from Japan and the Swami just grinned and said it's there and no you have to show it to me other it's just a dream you had and he said no it's there now just a little later somebody said I'm one of the Swami's from the Vedanta Society in the United States was visiting Baylor mutt so he has come to bow down to some Enid one and under because he's the vice president so this Swami I don't know which this this Swami was sometimes one of these centers in the West Coast she came in and he bowed down to some inner one and and and he said swami i was traveling from USA to india to Calcutta on the way the plane stopped we stopped for a couple of day I stopped over in Japan and before taking my flight yesterday I thought I should get something for you and went to the shopping mall and I purchased this pair of slippers for your use and the Swami just looked at it and he looked at the assistant and he said okay a stunning case of a dream being true I can't I can't explain it yes yeah yeah I don't understand you know but he did not say it was true at that point of time also he just said this there's something he said and it became a fact yeah right so if you like like I said you anything that happens in the dream you go to the Empire State Building suddenly you're woken up you wake up in your bed you don't wake up in the Empire State Building so they obviously have not gone to the Empire State Building and that is what is called truth alright but the question is you are dreaming that you are in the Empire State Building now right it doesn't say anything about you your dream is not about going to the Empire State Building seven days later it's now and when you're waking up now woken up now you are using the Empire State Building no yeah you are you to eat a cookie and then you eat three cookies in the dream when you wake up in the morning if your blood sugar is checked will it reflect three cookies or one cookie one cookie so it's it's not I'm not talking about prediction I'm talking about the reality and the monk who asked this question of Swami near one on anther you got the slippers sandals in the dream where are they show me and then Sanders did arrive later on so that's what the strong in Iran the same but never ends is saying they'd see the sandals are here so the dreams are so people will say dreams are true but I am contradicting that mandoke Upanishad is contradicting that what Nirvana teasing is also is contradicted here it was an incredible prediction that it came out to be true fine but we are dealing at it at a different level here all together welcome to you Manduca says in spite of that the dream is not true if the dream were true he would have had two pairs of slippers right if you see I I go to a shop and you purchase me a pair of slippers when I come back what should I have one pair of slippers if you bring me one one more pair of slippers then there are two pairs of slippers in the dream what what what you did if that was really true you went to Japan and you got a pair of slippers you should be able to show me two pair of slippers and if you Swami brings you another pair of slippers you should have two pairs of slippers but instead what do you have you have one pair of slippers in the waking world which you somehow dreamt about happening your dream it was very powerful predictive capacity tat it's something that happened in the waking State so what I'm saying is when you use language like a dream is true you are not meaning it in the sense something is true in the waking State in the waking State when you say I purchased a pair of shoes from the shop you mean you've got a pair of shoes now in the dream when you say I purchased a pair of shoes in a shop and it's true it means that even you woke up and later on you went and purchase a pair of shoes or somebody gave you a pair of shoes it predicted something in the waking State but it did not as not you cannot count it along with the waking State that is how we are talking about 2dr and with and the three what happens in the waking cannot be counter what happens in the dream cannot be counted along with your waking text otherwise what the pair of slippers Swami Brahma Honda bought for so I may need one and there would be a second pair of slippers apart from the one which the Swami from coming from the United States but yeah so it's not real in that sense it may have a predictive power God apart is not interested in predictive powers it's what is existence real yes yes yes yes right it's a connection made in a dream that turned out to be true in the waking world that's possible your your question is can real knowledge come in the dream yes for example calculate the benzene copper we all read about at the school he dreamt of a snake eating its own tail right Ouroboros yes and that helped him to make the connection if I had dreamt about it I wouldn't have may have mentioned the donivans because because he's been thinking so deeply about it for days and months and years maybe and then the thing clicks in the dream state and he gets an insight but what God our Father would say congratulations on your insight but there was no snake there eating its day it was a representation in your mind which helped to make the connections in your mind and the knowledge you get see the knowledge you get it at the level of the mind the dream is also at the level of the mind nobody denies that you dreamt something but did it physically happen in the world no but can you get knowledge is knowledge is in the mind you can make connections in the mind of mind is active in the dream you might make connection a lot of those connections might be trash they might not actually work in the world but some of them might be actual breakthroughs not only knowledge scientific knowledge spiritual knowledge also can come in the dream so many people have got initiation mantras exchange the dreams yeah so the holy mother comes and they meet and they talk and she gives mantra diksha what God our Father would say that you got the mantra diksha but you didn't actually physically go there and meet Holy Mother this transmission was done in your mind but physically there was you are actually still there in the bed and sleeping so that's the point the approach of Vedanta is to strictly stick to the facts yes yeah yeah yeah exactly yeah but it's not vast in the physical sense so like if you conceive of the universe galaxies it's not a physical galaxy in there in the neuron it's your neuron thinking about a galaxy in your thoughts in the mind so it's not physical space right so you can dream about it but you can't force an actual physical object into a neuron yes I'll come to you if there was a question here I come to you true but you know there's a principle of the principle of economy they call it Occam's razor the simplest explanation is probably the best one also for example why can't I say that my mind went to another world in which I had a different body and in which there is a Empire State Building but the point is if you're woken comes back in a second so all of that you'll have to think about it that way yeah yes what what what God apart is doing is that might you can think in that way but what Gordo pod is doing it remember all of this Vedanta we are studying it's good to remain rooted so all of this Vedanta we are studying we're studying in the waking state okay no but that's that's a possibility that's that's a possibility so we are we are rooting ourselves in the waking state and then looking back upon our experiences in dream so we are analyzing the dream state from the waking state what you are seeing is also a strand of thought in Advaita Vedanta they've got a father will himself used such arguments when it comes a little later but we just hold that in abeyance as many of the objections will come up here will answer the differences between waking and dreaming he will try to reduce all our waking experiences into dream experience I mean the difference he will try to obliterate and when we rebel against that obliteration we say no waking is more real than dreaming then he will ask us what are your reasons why are you saying waking is more real than dreaming when we give the reasons one by one he will cut down all those reasons and one of the techniques he'll use for cutting it down he says something like this it could just as well be in a dream state that you were asking this question and everything all the reasoning is being done in dream state and you can snap out of it and make out of it and see the whole thing was false now one Swami in the Himalayas he put it this way very powerfully he says many years pass in your dream many years have passed suddenly you wake up you visited many lands and over a span of months and years suddenly you wake up and see that you are on your on your little cot on your bed in your little little room now he asks which is more powerful the years that passed in the dream or that one second of a which cancels the other one the one second of making of it because it brings with itself the knowledge that was not this is which is more powerful the vast lands that you visited in the dream or that little room you woke up in that little room you woke up in the person in the dream who tells you all this is an appearance though everything goes to tell you it's real when you wake up all the information that you gathered through your senses was that more powerful or the words of that one person who told you that all this is an appearance that words of that one person more powerful more important because usually usually waking up from a dream brings with itself a corrective knowledge oh this was a dream I I was I was sleeping it brings with Twitter itself remember in the dream we do not have that when you go into a dream you don't remember your waking state that I was in the end on the bed now I have come elsewhere if you remember your waking state your dream is usually bound to collapse everything state yeah that's why they compared it to an error if you are aware of the two worlds together and you can switch back and forth you can get very confused like the Chinese philosopher Chuang su who said who was dreaming that he was a butterfly woke up sleeping under a tree so Chinese philosopher a nicely understood tree you were sleeping got up and then he said am i a philosopher am i but philosopher dreaming is the butterfly or a butterfly dreaming that is a philosopher you had a question in this sense that it gives spiritual knowledge yeah so that's it for today yes I'll come to you yeah yeah not only modern era in ancient years that in any ayah philosophy discussed case what about a heated iron ball glowing hot iron ball so there's no smoke there probably not and it's full of fire that ball yeah yeah yes this column this is not related to this this is the example this is the this is the this is to do do with the universe and falsity of the universe yeah what are you asking oh why true why is it why is the world false if I say to you just now the world is false should ask why why are you saying that won't you ask we consider the world to be true we consider this waking world to be true at least outside the Vedanta class we do we consider this waking world to be true now God our Father insists that it's false and I'm going to show you it's false then they said we are to be a say well be a game show us to show us you must give reasons you can't just say it's false even here to show the fire see there is smoke coming out of an apartment let me see the context what are we trying to do we are trying to get knowledge of the fire there by the smoke we inferred the fire if there's no smoke there is no question of anything because we can't see the fire also there there is smoke therefore we say there is fire and we go with the fire engine now the question here is how do you know that there is fire that's the question this is called inferential knowledge if you see fire finished there's no need for any ayah logic but if you do not see the fire and yet you are claiming there is fire why why are you claiming there is fire then you can claim this file anywhere what what is the mark what is the sign what is the cause for claiming that there is fire I I claim that there is fire on the hill or let's say and that apartment in Manhattan because I see smoke pouring out of the windows that's how people function that's how you get inferential knowledge otherwise you can't claim that there is fire they may be fire without smoke there you never know but the thing which we are interested in is smoke is pouring out what does that mean to us there is fire there then you ask the question how do you know what's the connection the connection is wherever there is smoke there is fire how did you come to that action actually we saw the two together all the time we have seen it in kitchens and the different places where there is smoke and fire together somebody's smoking we see fire and smoke together so we have established a connection now then you see one part of the one term of the connection you infer the other one is there just like science you get data from instruments with that data you make an inference you don't actually see atoms or electrons you don't see them you get data particle accelerators what does particle actually did they just collect huge amounts of static statistical data and on that you make inferences unless you have the data on what basis will you make an inference unless you have the smoke how will you say there's more fire in that particular apartment unless you give a reason why should I accept the falsity of the world when it seems true to me you have to demonstrate it a my answer is this your question yeah yeah but but remember that sir I was discussing something else there the point there was that you have to be careful in logic wherever there is smoke there is fire does not mean the opposite that wherever there is a fire they'll respond yes yes but here we have to demonstrate under falsity we need a reason yeah oh yes they'll get many causes but they will show some causes here so that's the whole chapter that's what the chapter is about they will build up those causes in like smoke and what is the cause but for what do you see in this waking world which leads you to infer it is false that's what we are asking we are asking God apart or what do you see here show us why do you think it is false what's the crime what is the so for example in the dream world why do you think everybody says it's false but why so one example one thing he said was some Rita Twain I hate tuna the word hate who was used hey to means the cause the cause is insufficient space there is a contradiction there you have a building requires tremendous space and yet you are forced to say I imagined it it was there in that little nerves so it must have been imagined it couldn't have an actual building couldn't have been there yeah alright last question deep sleep is the only state in the waking State Samadhi except Samadhi okay a deep state of restfulness peacefulness calmness some people take drugs and tranquilizers yeah they do that is the purpose that's the purpose to stop thinking those who take tranquilizers and other things like that somebody pointed out that some people shoot themselves as I will notice they shoot themselves in the head there's a reason they want this to stop sometimes very very agitated people so yeah so there might be different states the state of sublime peacefulness when you see beautiful nature profound satisfaction for a few moments when you have achieved something great in many ways when you come to a state of serene quietness but it gets very disturbed very easily in the waking State a simple blankness also that also might be there but why is there some reason why you're asking this yes knowledge more than concentrated one point in mind the point to be what are we doing here we are not trying to get a concentrate at one point in mind concentrated one point in mind is the pursuit of Patanjali yoga the pursuit here is knowledge knowledge of Turia bye-bye analysis concentrate at one point it might very helpful scattered mind not helpful but the point is not to a concentrated mind you go to a class in Columbia University the point is to understand the physics and the math which is being taught there the point is not to be very concentrated and you can't tell the professor don't talk I'm very concentrated don't don't disturb me no no so here the point is knowledge