Video 22

23. Mandukya Upanishad | Chapter 2 Karika13

the peace chant ohm bhadram Carini vishnu yama Deva petrm Pesce moksha period Etra Styron gosh - bogum shasta no v:v Ashima Deva Heaton yada yahoo swass Tina Indra British rava swass Tina pooja Vishwa vida swass Tina Stock Show or astronomy Swirsky no brie hospital Otto own Shanti Shanti Shanti so we were on the 12th verse of the second chapter it's really a beautiful verse and a very important verse so I'd like you all to repeat it after me again the twelfth verse of the second chapter culpa a cosmonaut monomer culpa a cosmonaut monomyth Madiba's from yama divas Lemuria sahiba boot dirty hidden saver boot dirty bead on ETV don Tanisha aha ETV Don Tanisha so it's saying that the self which is pure consciousness by itself projects itself as this universe by itself how with the power of Maya and then the self which is consciousness itself becomes the knower the experiencer which experiences all that it has projected and this is this conclusion is arrived at through Vedanta 80 Veyron tennis chair what is the context what's going on here come remember where does it all start the key text of the entire Mundaka Upanishad and monocoque Erika is the seventh month of the Mundaka Upanishad if you remember long long ago we we did seventh month love demand open assured in the first chapter in the seventh mantra there was one word that prop enjoy Pasha mom the entire universe the silence of cessation of the universe there was a text there was a world it basically means the universe is an appearance now that one word in the open Ishod in the seventh mantra gora pada he composes an entire chapter ii chapter which we are doing now to justify that word to prove that word see that was something from the Upanishad now what God about is true doing he is using logic and experience logic based on our experience to show that that the that the universe is actually an appearance it's it's not an independent reality as we take it to be we take it to be an independent reality out there it exists by itself and I come and experience it it's something that happens to me something other than me that's our common sense materialistic approach that it is a material universe apart from me the experiencer but the Upanishads says no it is an appearance to prove it is an appearance and summarizing what we have done in the second chapter to prove it is an appearance two key arguments were given do you remember two key arguments were given guru pada uses the example of the dream just as in a dream in our dreams we see people places things and there are events which happen there is a space and the time and all of that in the dream and yet when we wake up what do we say all that we experience there and I myself I was there as a part of it the whole thing was dreamt up imagined in my in my mind when I was I was dreaming so the dream example is used by guru pada to demonstrate the falsity we in sanskrit mithya falsity of this world experience remember the word Mattia akka is to be understood correctly it means a relative truth even the dream experience felt true it did not feel false when we were dreaming it felt true when they were dreaming it's only after coming out of the whole state and reflecting when you reflect back upon it you come to the realization that it was false it's false with respect to the waking world in the dream world it felt very real now so when we say the world is false or an appearance what exactly is meant another word you can use is a relative truth it's not absolutely true the world is not absolutely true or to use another term where they can understand this is a lower truth from lower to higher truth or the highest truth highest truth is you the Atman be experiencing consciousness now what arguments did God our Father use did the author use to prove what what were the arguments that the world is an appearance fundamentally two arguments two characteristics of this experience prove its falsity what are the two characteristics one is in sanskrit drish shift or the very fact that it is an object of experience it depends upon the experiencing mind it depends upon the experience sir what does that mean everything that we experience in the world depending upon the instruments of experiences you'd apply if you use eyes you will see forms if you use ears you will hear sounds the same universe taste touch smell or thoughts and memories and ideas only in the mind itself depending on the instrument you use your experience of the world changes is it not so hmm very kinda says if you get another sense a rattlesnake sees in in infrared so there are infrared goggles you could see what a rattlesnake sees if you put that on you'd see the world differently so different depending upon this the instruments we deploy the world appears differently now the world in itself what is it like can we know it which is basically asking can you know a world without using any instruments of knowledge no you cannot so a world appears to you through your instruments of knowledge by instruments of knowledge in Sanskrit brahmana I mean the eyes ears nose touch or even the mind if you don't use the mind ultimately everything comes to the mind is mediated through the mind all the senses pour their inputs into the mind and there the world is reconstructed for you without the mind where is your world where is your world without the mind proof when you switch off the mind we have an experience luckily the experience of deep sleep our experiences of what we call unconsciousness in Vedanta would say unmindful of our mindfulness but there the world disappears basically is it not true the world disappears so without the mind we do not experience a world and with the mind the experience of the world it entirely depends on the mind and the sense organs so this is what it means reshaped work it is an object of experience therefore being an object of experience it cannot be the absolute truth it has to be a relative truth going deeper if you remember the way I explained ratio to us you cannot experience anything apart from consciousness all experience depends on consciousness are you with me all experience depends on consciousness I gave the example of once in a seeing something with the eyes so I went to the eye doctor because I was seeing blurry and he did the doctor said yeah there's something seriously wrong and what is wrong you have hit 40 that's what seriously wrong that's Ibiza they have good eye doctors know that this is an unchanged the unfailing sign of reaching 40 almost in every case there will be deterioration in sight yeah please let him sit here so it depends on Oh so the example was when I went to the eye doctor so I saw that the last time I'd been to an eye doctor ophthalmologist they had in India it was very simple they had a chart out there and they asked you to read off the letters and when you got to a particular row you couldn't read they will give you different kinds of glasses and you see if in a time you have you read it okay that's it done it was very simple I asked him can you read this can you see clearly and you'd say yes it's better now done I noted that chart and glasses but ultimately you had to ask the person are you seeing clearly but when I went now this to to the to the doctor here they had so many machines for simple you know glasses for just you know what happens when you get older but then there are so many machines you went from this room to that room to these scanners and everything I thought wow it's all all mechanical now and the computers can tell us what is the right classes but to my surprise at the very end they gave me the right glasses and and then they said can you seek correctly now again in spite of all those instruments they ultimately had to check back with what to you the conscious being right no computer can can replace that that final feedback from you the come conscious being because if the computer says the lenses are out of order in this particular way and this glass should settle the problem perfectly no need to ask the patient we the patient says but I still can't see and will the doctor say no no there's nothing wrong with you it's just a welcome to computer said it's perfectly all right you have got that much power in the eyes and the these glasses are perfect for that and that's it but I can't see doesn't matter nobody will say that it's ridiculous ultimately every experience depends on you the conscious being entire experience whether you believe in God your theist whether you are atheist you're an atheist in consciousness believe in God in consciousness scientist in consciousness a materialist and non duelist of a daunting Buddhist whatever you are in consciousness without consciousness nothing so the conclusion Dennis if this world is a relative reality so that was the that was the reason dripped oh the reason for falsity of the world is falsity or relative truth or lower truth because it depends upon because it is an object of experience it depends on consciousness then the second reason for the falsity of the world do you remember on it yet what the impermanence impermanence why would impermanence be a reason for falsity we know everything is impermanent and impermanent I mean this body is impermanent at a particular date it was born and in a few years time maybe it will die I mean it will surely die but when it'll die we don't know but it'll die so it's impermanent even this building this city and so on even the world even the universe so at one time it is created one time destroyed but we normally say in between it exists right before my term I burped and before the death of the body we normally say we exist we are here why would this be false do you remember the the chain of reasoning why would you see what is my question it is clear everybody agrees that things are impermanent things are born and destroyed created born and died they bought they are born and they die they are created and destroyed but common sense with normal way we deal with it is yes in between they exist they exist in between but then why is it saying that in between also they are non-existence or their appearances they are not real why if you remember the the chain of reasoning things which are born and they die created and destroyed they have borrowed existence do you remember the borrowed existence the example of the fire and heat the potato is not naturally hot the water is not naturally boiling it naturally they're cold but they have all drawn borrowed heat from the fire underneath fire is intrinsically hot whenever this fire it is hot now the sign of having intrinsic existence and sign of having borrowed existence the sign of having borrowed existence is a borrowed sign of having borrowed heat is it is some time sought and sometimes cold it gains heat and loses heat the sign of having borrowed existence it is it is sometimes existing sometimes not existing in other words it is born and it is it dies it is created and it's destroyed I am going very fast because I have repeated these number of times so for this reason also impermanence in sanskrit on it theorem all the things that we experience they are objects of experience drishya and they are impermanent on it because of these two reasons all that we experience is a relative reality not absolutely real lower truth not a higher truth false not real media in that case what is absolute reality I'm summarizing the entire chain of thought which has come till now what is absolute reality what is the highest truth what is real not false the answer is consciousness itself being itself 2d and the fourth neither the Waker not the wakers world neither the dreamer not the dreamers world neither the deep sleeper nor the deep sleep darkness but the one consciousness in which they appear and disappear which you are that is the absolute reality anything that is an object cannot be an absolute reality so the only thing that is left over is the subject is you the experiencer it follows there therefore I let me just add it here the universe look at the boldness of advaitha because you see it therefore it's false because it's an object to consciousness therefore it cannot be the highest truth if any object cannot be the highest truth then it follows that no universe because universe is an object to consciousness no universe can be the highest truth this universe is the dream universe is not the highest truth the waking universe is not the highest truth and if you substitute this waking universe with some other much better much finer universe you go to heaven for example you see a heavenly world then Sanskrit sloka world would that be true would that be the absolute truth what do you think you're not very sure why not logic because it's an object because you you'd be asked are you experiencing heaven or yes it's really nice it's heavenly because it is you experience you're having a heavenly experience it must not be false it must be an appearance whatever you experience being an object of experience automatically renders it a relative truth not the absolute truth the only thing that is excluded from this is the experiencer you yourself your real nature which is neither the Waker not the dreamer not the deep sleeper but the one consciousness the fourth in which all of this is appearing and disappearing that leads to the question will be there last time if that is so then what is all this all these people and things and places which we see we ourselves with bodies and minds having so many kinds of experiences lifetime after lifetime where does this come from what is all this who projects all of this and who experiences all of this who is this person leading a life here now and the answer was given in the 12th verse all of this is nothing but that one pure consciousness itself that consciousness projects itself as this universe as the waking universe dream universe and the deep sleep darkness and it itself that pure consciousness becoming the Waker experiences awaking universe don't look so confused I'm talking about you right now you the consciousness becoming this person experiences yourself that consciousness alone in this form of this universe as Vivek Kundra said one alone exists it appears as nature soul the experiencer and experienced and yet it is one one consciousness alone which you are really so that is the verse called piety projects at Menard monomer project itself what is all this made of of itself of this consciousness alone all of this is made of that of you you are this universe you means not this person the fourth pure consciousness and it is projected who does all this it is you who do it I don't remember doing it not you as not you as this individual being that pure consciousness you remember with the power of Maya so a Maya Maya by the power of my very unique power of Maya projects what material is projected do you remember the instrumental cause and the material cause both are you the consciousness Maya projects you as this universe and then who experiences who is the laker in that case the dreamer that the individual being who's sitting in the class you alone that that pure consciousness alone so when we talk about that pure consciousness when we talk about the forth we are not talking about something abstract we are talking very much about you the person sitting right there so Sarah would dare take a Ramadan means the variety of entities and tables dogs and cats stars and quasars and quarks all of that religious objects and scientific objects and art objects and material things and concepts and stories and fiction all of this these are Veda differentiations they're all good really experienced by you the individual Wow what a tremendous story where do you get it wait aren't honest yeah this is this is what you get from Vedanta at 4:00 p.m. in the Vedanta Society on Wednesdays now let us go ahead 13th worse Vica roti operon Bhavan the kuru operon Pavan antoshka tibia burst eaten and thirsty tibia busted on Nia tongue snobbish cheetah near town shabu his cheetah a bomb culpa yet a Prabhu even culpa yatta Prabhu the Lord manifests diversely the mundane things existing in the mind turning the mind outwards he creates the well-defined things as well as undefined things thus does the Lord imagine what does it mean remember here it is called Prabhu Prabhu is a word in Sanskrit which is normally used for God here are whom does it mean it means it Ishwara but here it means you deep your consciousness you the pure consciousness with the power of Maya you are Prabhu the the Ishwara the Lord of the universe how is this universe created the two kinds of universe which are the two kinds of universe the waking universe and the dream universe the dream universe it says a piranha on the inconsequential things in the dream universe why inconsequential because they arrive in there and they depart within minutes every dream has a different setup they have no value at all when you wake up it's all gone next time in a dream there's another set of objects so those inconsequential things are imagined in the mind by you the that same consciousness when the mind is turned inwards inwards beings away from the external world away from the body and instant the sense organs and when the mind is turned outwards working through the body and sense organs you experience a world of sight and sound and smell and taste and touch the external world more solid entities which seemed to last from each waking state to another waking state to another waking state so they are called niat on the objects experienced in the waking state so the same consciousness Prabhu the same Lord projects the waking universe and dream universe untouched gypte means when the mind is turned inwards when is the mind turned inwards indeed in in dream and by his tryptamines when the mind is extraverted when is the mind extroverted in waking so this is the meaning of 1312 Ekeroth t manifests variously up around wanting inconsequential entities seen in dreams untouched GT we have a state on when the mind is turned inwards in dream and awaking universe near tumkur by his cipta even when the mind is turned outwards with the sense organs seeing hearing smelling tasting touching the same lord projects an external universe both the point being both are projections of the Lord through Maya and who is this Lord which God Shiva or Kali Durga are you actually the real you the real you you alone project this entire universe you are that but by you I do not mean this particular body mind complex sitting here this is also part of your projection now verses 14 and 15 actually a yes which one is this or you are you're looking at the you're looking at the candy come into the commentary Shankar Acharya minute so this is the other book that's why we have done this is the Gumby that is the nickel and in the book right and anyway that's good that's correct read out the translation imagines in various alright now what it means is our look at the twofold creation one is our dreams and one is the external universe our dreams what we see in our dreams clearly they are products of our vaasanas' vasanas means the impressions in the mind from previous experiences what we have experienced throughout the waking and in past lives that part of that is projected outwards projected in our in our dreams so the world we see in our dreams is based on the collected experiences of our minds that is vastness that's a dream now what is the external world often in Vedanta you will see it says the dreams are manifestations of our minds which we agree right they are made of our minds but it also says the external world is a manifestation of our mind there one thing you to remember the external world is a manifestation in the mind of Ishwara it does not mean there are different approaches to Atlanta but the common approaches it does not mean that you this individual being is imagining this external world out there this being and external world all are in the mind of Ishwara just as the your dreams all the people and things in your dreams are in your mind I'll repeat that in our dreams whatever we see in our dreams living and non-living they are all projections of our minds the dreamers mind similarly in the waking world it is not that you the individual being is imagining this universe if we were to say that that would be what is in Western philosophy called the birth of the Berkeley and subjective idealism but it's not talking about that it says no no for you this is like a solid world out there but all of this you this personal being and this world all of them are projections in the mind of issue Allah and they are based on the impressions collected in ish whereas mind over creations universe is coming and going so that way yes yeah the consciousness plus name and form yes right right do you see the question if you experience something as an object an object of experience it is the first argument given by God about the drishya to a object of experience being an object of experience it cannot be absolutely true it has to be a relative truth or a lower truth or false same thing mithya now his question is didn't the open shot just say or a garuda bother just say it is consciousness alone which projects itself out as the universe and then experiences itself in that case isn't it true that whatever we are experiencing is conscious consciousness itself but if it's a knob if consciousness becomes an object to itself then it becomes false it becomes a lower truth so it's consciousness is lower truth but didn't you say consciousness is the higher truth is the absolute truth if you get the question then the answer will be interesting otherwise what are you talking about do you see all right the answer is simple what are we seeing the objects that we are seeing is as I said consciousness plus name-and-form true consciousness plus name-and-form right you are seeing men women sky earth whatever you see hear smell taste touch do you actually are you actually seeing consciousness are you actually smelling consciousness tasting consciousness touching consciousness no what do you get sensations form sounds these are what are called names and forms so the objects are all these names and forms right there inner reality is consciousness but what becomes an object to your experience is the name and form then is the name and form false of course in fact the name and form itself is Maya consciousness experiences itself because yeah but it experiences but to have an experience of naming form they must be based on consciousness the consciousness itself in itself does not become an object of experience what becomes an object of experience is name and form then you sit in but then is that name and form something apart from consciousness no it is nothing other than consciousness itself that is true but then what expedite experiences itself it experiences itself with the help of name and form and that name and form is a projection which is not real consciousness can never be your consciousness should the Chaitanya can never be an object what can be an object is name and form and that being an object it's not real and it has to be like that if it is real then it becomes a second reality apart from consciousness then there is - not a what is what is an object when you define consciousness yes right so we have been over this when you say use it use the name consciousness what does it refer to it refers to Paramatma but is it an object but point to something in your experience what it refers to you see in fact this is a good question and if you follow it rigorous little lead straight to enlightenment no no really III really mean it watch how it works I'm asking he says that when you he is asking if you name something as consciousness you just said names and forms are objects and they are false now you're naming consciousness aren't you in some sense objectifying it true then is it false have you made consciousness into an object and therefore the logic will immediately apply on it that an object becomes false no why not I'm asking you objectify consciousness and show me what what do you what exactly is it that you are calling consciousness in your experience right now the beauty of advaitha is it can be demonstrated by experience all the time what do they call consciousness let me help you we call consciousness the conscious experiences of seeing hearing smelling tasting touching that's what consciousness studies scientists would call consciousness thinking remembering imagining creating feeling loving hating all of this are what would come under this set of consciousness okay are you with me so far other than this can you is there anything that you experience as consciousness no these are what you call consciousness it could be some Aarti it could be some ecstatic spiritual state also now in all of these things there are two one is the changing object of experience giving rise to different experiences see you see something that's an experience you touch it that's an experience you hear it that's an experience you name it you think about it you remember it you memorize it these are all experiences but they are all different experiences one is the experience of a form one is the experience of a sound one is the experience of thinking memorizing these are all different experiences but what is common to all of them the experiencer of the experiencing consciousness in all the different what creates these differences in experience the objects are different one is this form one is a sound one is a smell one is a memorization whatever it is so the objects are different giving rise to different experiences but the experiencing consciousness in all of them is one and the same it does not change it's what generates these these experiences with the help of various names and forms various names and forms the very word various means that different gives rise to various experiences with the help of sense organs and mind they are all changing and they are all objective parts of experience the pure subject which is not an objective part of experience is consciousness itself it never becomes an object it is that which objectifies therefore it does not get affected by the ambit of that argument are you beginning to see you must first see logically so logically if it makes sense then see it psychologically try to follow it back psychologically you will get it no okay but the good question see this is the beauty of Advaita Vedanta because it is based on logic and experience if you generate logical questions any kind of doubt a genuinely good question is a doorway to enlightenment because they experience what we are talking about is present right now always present and the methodology of Advaita Vedanta is asking generating a doubt following it through through your reasoning in any other path question and answer would only give you some information see the path of yoga meditation for example if you ask should I keep my eyes fully open or fully closed door half open or closed and I would say suppose keep it half open now what have you got you have got some information and advice but you have actually got to sit down and do it then only it will give you some result here on the other hand there is nothing to be done in that sense it's something to be realized so these questions are desaad on the the spiritual practice you must fall learn to follow through with these questions first intellectually understand second first logically then psychologically right what I see but what happens there I can tell you there's a whole lot of study about this this is called flow I recommend that book to you min-hyuk's in me hi there's a book called flow which talks about these intense experiences they are usually experiences of timelessness of subject object differentiation that that goes away the experiences of of intense attention and focus they are usually very rich experiences which you value for for a long time and their experiences which can come in art in sports wherever you become intensely involved with something and you sort of transcend the feeling of I am doing this that feeling goes away for a time being it's a very heightened state of awareness that conscious thinking is not going on so much conscious self-aware thinking is not going on so much so that is an intense state of focus those are states which can be attained through meditation also in fact meditation aims to achieve such such states Patanjali yoga now what is its relationship to this what we are studying here those have potentially very good states in which to recognize the witness consciousness because the discursive mind is not working the egocentric mind is not working there because it's it's merged it's intensely active it's a very sattvic state now reflect back follow this reflect back upon your memory of that state and ask yourself to what it was had appearing clearly it was an experience what experienced it the conscious egocentric mind was was not there to say that I am experiencing this right it was not there it was merged in the activity in that experience then - what was it appearing because something was experiencing it what will happen is when you try to follow this up what will happen is usually our all our experience has this structure of subject and object here when temporarily subject and object emerged and yet it is a conscious experience it's a good doorway to recognize the witness consciousness otherwise what happens in normal just now if you ask who is experiencing this immediately the mind will say I am Here I am the ego with the mind and the instruments of knowledge it it stands in front of the consciousness witness consciousness and and assumes itself to be the experiencer but in those states the egocentric mind is fully engaged it has no time to assert itself separately differentiation is not there yes yes so your question is what is mine remember though we keep it open to first-time visitors this is really not for first-time visitors is the Vedanta study group so we have been intensively studying some advanced texts for a long time all right so what you are asking what is mind is it's a good question but also very preliminary right in the Vedantic structure mind is called the sir is a part of the subtle body there are precise definitions sankalpa vehicle path McCammon aha in the Vedanta sorry you will come across definition that which undertakes which things which ways or ways options is it this way or that way that is the mind it's a function so that's the definition yes it's defined by its function you want to know what is it in in itself what is the thing in itself it's a part of this subtle body the subtle body has three components the the pranamaya kosha the Manoa microtia and the big annamaya kosha the pranamaya kosha is constituted of the pancha prana the five functions of the vital force the Manama Akasha is constituted the mind is sankalpa vehicle part macam mana and the five sense organs the functions of the five sense organs and the Vig annamaya kosha is constituted of the country - and the Buddha ego and the booty and the cheetah is also included in the mono micro show so this is the constituent if you are asked for that know what are these constituted of these are constituted of what are called tun matras the subtle forms of the five elements space air fire water earth they have subtle forms sukshma tan Matra so their first evolute are these subtle bodies more details you'll have to go back to ABC of era hunter alright and they yourself your second part of your question was the dreams are constitute more constitute of our mind and the world is constituted of Ishwar as mind now our mind and is there some time when these dreams are not constituted of our minds and their visitations from a divine source yes we have certain very special what might be called spiritual experiences in dreams which are often unforgettable ordinary dreams they come and go these ones is these ones are some of the dreams which you remember not only do you remember it has a transformative effect on you it's something that is very valuable and precious to you for the rest of your life so this is like Yogi's have these experiences in the waking world through spiritual practices and sometimes we get it in dreams so they are not constituted by our minds entirely there might be elements in those dreams spiritual dreams which are constituted by our minds but there is definitely something which is coming from a cosmic source from here and Nagata all right let me go ahead verses 14 and 15 you might remember that I had actually touched upon them earlier when I was doing verse 9 10 there the question was what what then is the criterion of reality and these two verses came up at that point but let me go into this because there's a lot going on here let me do the 14th and 15th words today also 14th verse she talked Allah he and her two chittock Allah he enters to do a collage sahiba he do a collage a BA he cal pita eva t saruba culpa Tawhiti survey vitiation ano he took aha vishay shown on hey toka before i explain this let me give you the context just now we said that it's a very interesting discussion so pay attention you'll get a lot out of it just now we said that this one consciousness alone with the power of maya projects this waking world and with the mind turned inwards with the mind itself projects a dream world but both are projections both are false now somebody says the opponent says wait wait just a minute I have objections to this you are equating the dream world it's a projection and the waking world is also projection but this is not how we see it I agree with you this is the remember this the opponent who is saying the questioner who's asking I agree with you that the dream world is a projection of my mind ok fine but this waking world is not a projection of my mind or anybody's mind it's real it's out there there is a difference between the waking world and the dream world the dream world depends on my mind I agree when I stop dreaming the people in my dream the places in the dream what I dub that that dream and its constituents have disappeared they don't exist but when I am not experiencing this world the waking world suppose I go from this room to that room will this room disappear suppose all of us go away from this room and there is no other living being here who is experiencing this room will it disappear no we don't think that way its it goes against our common sense that this room is going to disappear if we are not experiencing it so why is this false this is what in fact this is what we considered to be real something that we exists independent of our experiencing it was there I I nobody was experiencing it it was there now we have come here and we are experiencing this room it is still there when we go away will all of us go away this room will still exist that's how he experienced the waking world hence this waking world is not false it's not like a dream don't compare it to a dream it's not a projection so I can see a lot of heads nodding here that's how it is that's how we think that that's good it's good that he is asking this question so we have to go into this is very interesting the non duelist first of all responds by saying we have never denied the difference between waking and dreaming notice even in the earlier verse it said with the mind turned outwards that means to the sense organs the issuer has projected the external world and you experience an external world with the mind turned inwards you experience a prole projected in your mind so clearly the difference between waking and dreaming even in the open assured wakers were dreamers but what is the wakers world what the consciousness experiences with the mind extraverted through sense organs is a wakers world but they're still false your question is like this Nandu list is telling the opponent your question is like suppose you see by Miss take a snake projected on a rope and by mistake you see water projected in the desert and then you you say and then we say that both are false and you say no no no no how can they be false one is a snake and one is water water and snake are different you are not differentiating between the two how can both be false this is not the real answer by the way this is our our intermediate answer you are not so we are making a distinction you are saying it's like you are saying that because it that is water and this is a snake snake and water are not the snape remember what water am I talking about in what snake the rope mistaken to be able those classic examples in Vedanta rope mistaken to be a snake and in the Mirage the desert mistaken to be water now you are arguing that water red snake are not the same how can you equate the two we say we are not equating the two we are saying water is water and snake is snake but the point is in this case both of them are false that's what we are trying to say but the the opponent could go further and argue that was not our point don't confuse the issue water and snake are both for false the Mirage water in the snake in the rope are false that we understand what we are saying here is to follow this carefully this is the crucial question the difference between waking objects and the dream objects are such not like above Mirage water and rob snake the difference is such that it makes one real and the other false the you see the question it makes this is a person who is asking a question to the non but it is not the non-dual expression the quiet person asking the question is saying that waking objects are different and dream objects are different and the difference is such that it makes the waking object real and the dream object falls why what is the difference the difference is the waking the dream objects where they are experienced they are there only when you are dreaming they are entirely internal in your mind they are not out there what you are experiencing in your dream because they are internal in your mind because they have no external existence because they disappear once you wake up from the dream hence we agree dream objects are false but the waking objects are entirely different they are outside your mind they are out there they're not in your mind they exist when you experience them and they exist when you do not experience them right therefore this egg making waking world is real a separate material world quite apart from you you cannot equate them to a dream world you cannot say they are false this is a question answer it are you answering it or are you you're reinforcing the cry yes this is this is something that will really appeal to us because this is how most of us think this is the common sense approach the whole thing yes yes yes true it experience as experience of thought in you the consciousness when you are walking down towards the subway but in experience also outside it here that is the argument that they are making yes it experience exists in your mind but it also exists outside your mind well that's how we take it now now you are too good as we bid on tasted sedated difficult to argue with all right I'll take your leave but let me now go to the answer what they are saying what is God about this answer here there's a powerful question do you see the power of the question it's the question everybody will ask all right now God upon us answer is he says he gives a preliminary answer here and the real answer I'll tell you but the preliminary answer is this they sometimes in in debate the opponent's position is accepted and and it is cut-down reason is given to show that our initial argument stands and then the this is that this is the temporary answer the real answer is the opponent's position also is rejected completely so the difference is this the first one where you accept in English also we say that accepting for the sake of argument accepting for the sake of argument or in mathematical proofs if it is so it will lead to a what is called reduction at ad absurdum absurd conclusion so for the first for the first half of this thing God our Father accepts the question that yes waking and dreaming or dream objects are very different he says yes waking and dream objects' a very different sanskrit it is called to shear to do Janani I which means to share to means be calmed Durga no means you crook I give it to you it says Toshio means I give it to you to shoot mean to be satisfied alright I give it to you though jenna means and a an unpleasant person or a bad person I give it to you I admit it what you are saying but still what we said follows how first part of it is I admit it how are the different and got upon the helps the opponent see this is clearly how the two are different waking and dreaming how jitka Allah he enters two things that exist internally as long as the thought lasts like dreams like daydreams hallucinations as long as the thought lasts and things that are externally related to the two points of time externally related to two points of time do i Acala if you literally translate here is where it gets complicated tick tock Allah means mental time things which exist only in internal mental time like dream objects what you saw in the dream the people you saw they exist only as long as your dream glass laughs and they have no existence apart from that that's dream dream objects what are external objects it he uses the time he uses the word Dwyer Carla literally if you translate it it means twin times and the mental time wins tick tock Allah or mental time these are dreams or dream objects you can't see them right I have to use a hundred dream objects and twin time is waking objects by the way by waking object I don't mean objects that are that awake that I've woken up I mean the objects that you see when you are awake making waking state objects actually so this term Dwyer Carla twin time and cheetah column mental time this is a little complicated that's why this verse is quite interesting how do you define dream objects that's pretty easy he uses the term mental time they exist only as long as you are dreaming if they exist in your mind that's why it's called cheetah kala as long as the mind is dreaming it up it exists when the mind stops dreaming it it's gone so for example you're having pizza and actually it's a dream and somebody wakes you up so you don't say that oh I should have put it in the dream refrigerator the dream dream pizza and dream refrigerator the next time I go and dream I'll take it out and have one of the dream snack no because it's gone do you don't have to worry about it getting spoiled and you don't you can't expect it will be there when you go back into the dream because it lasts only as long as you are dreaming and it has no existence apart from you're dreaming it up but then how do you define an objective thing which exists like this hall for example how would you say how would you define it what term would you use so you hear a god upon the uses of an interesting term twin times but twin time what he means it is it exists when you are experiencing it and it continues to exist when you are not experiencing it he is helping the opponent he says this is what you want to say right it exists when you are experiencing it and it exists when you are not experiencing it twin time and Shankaracharya further to be helpful he uses a word on you Anya cheddar and complicates the matter much further what it means is they are mutually determined by each other he goes into little depth there he gives an example he the example of a man milking a cow this is the example he gives for what for awaking of object in the waking state he says it's like drea Carla those that are possessed of two times that is which are related to different times which are mutually determined on new or near Wichita sanskrit word means mutually determined example he says as for instance he stays during the milking that means milkman is there during the milking of the cow what does it mean that the cow is milked as long as the milkman is there and he stays there as long as the cow is milked that means they are mutually determined by each other what exactly he wants to say is that dream follow this dream objects exist for you the dreaming mind for the dreamers mind but waking objects exist for each other right the dream objects the plate on which you are having the pizza the plate and the pizza do not exist for each other both of them exist for your mind only in the dream but you go to the shop and order a pizza in the waking state and though you are experiencing the plate and you are experiencing the pizza but quite apart from your experiencing the pizza and the plate the plate and the pizza exist for each other also does that make sense once again yes I am trying to put it in my words what Shankaracharya is saying his words are they are mutually determined and his example of milk and the cow milking the cow is not very I don't think it clarifies the matters very much mutually determined means this that dream objects in the dream exist for whom for only the dreamers mind they don't exist for each other what do I mean by that the plate on which I'm eating a pizza in the dream I'm sitting at the table and eating a pizza the pizza is on a plate I'm eating it the pizza and the plate both exist for my mind that means they exist in my mind only big in my mind they have no other existence at all what is their mutual relationship there is none they have they don't have any kind of mutual relationship because apart from their relation to my mind they have no existence at all all of them are imagined by my mind whereas they exist only then I experienced them in the dream whereas you go to a pizza shop and you order a pizza and you're eating a pizza there is a pizza and there is a plate and even when you are experiencing them they are there but when you are not experiencing them they are still there there is the pizza and the plate the pizza exists and he sits on the plate they exist with relation to its each other that existing with relation to each other that that is called the second time of the exist of the first time is when you are experiencing and eating it the second is even when you are not eating it those things still exist how for each other they are mutually related to each other no it's sort of roundabout way of putting it yes that's that that's true in dreams and also in baking usually if if you are if you are very hungry now in the waking state what it means is in the waking state even when you are out of the equation remember this not what the non-dualistic it's what the opponent wants to say the non delicious is just giving you a logical framework of saying it even when you the experiencing mind you are out of the equation the pizza still goes on existing on the plate the plate and the pizza the olives which means what he wants to say is the objects of this waking world exist for you when you are experiencing them when you are not experiencing them and you go over to another place all these objects Tillich's exist for each other in the relationship as you find them the table and the chair and the altar and the fan they all have their particular relationships and they exist in this way whether you experience it or not this is the sign of the waking world and so the argument is this is real and the dream world is not real I concede that the dream world is false but I'd maintain that this waking world is real why do i Acala because of twin times they exist during let's put it this way they exist during experience time they exist during no experience time also ok this is the easiest way of putting it when you are not experiencing it the realist the materialist says the material world continues to exist whether you experience it or not alright is this understandable this is what sort of convoluted way they are putting it because if she logically the the dream world exists in dreams how do you know because it exists for me the dreamer it appears to me in me dreamt up by me fine now in those terms suppose I ask this question the waking world continues to exist when you are not experiencing it how do you know for whom or what does it exist you can answer it exists for each other for it for the different entities in in itself these entities exist in relation to each other not not in relation just to you independent of you yes right the relative yes that's also another track that's the tacked track that the Buddhists take that they are mutually dependent they have no individual existence they call it pratityasamutpada dependent coordination or dependent origination the Buddhists say that the world is an appearance because nothing has independent existence in itself all depends on causes and conditions they all come up together or they disappear together so that is that's that's also one one way of putting it but here the materialist is saying no no no the it's a common-sense approach they exist depending on each other and that's the sign of reality that's why they are real that's a common-sense approach that if you don't get into philosophy that's the normal way we deal with the world we say this is real because it exists apart from you they depend on each other but they exist apart from you now what is the answer to this God apotres answer is regardless of this we admit this difference yes the dream remember this is only preliminary admission to share to do jhana there already satisfied with your logic be happy with your logic even with this distinction even admitting this distinction still the waking world is false why have you not paid attention to the reason we gave the original reason on it yet what impermanent all these things in the world which they exist the pizza and the plate are the permanent or impermanent they are impermanent even in the waking world are impermanent if they are impermanent that means they come into existence and they disappear from existence they produced and destroyed born and time if they come into existence and they disappear from existence which means existence is not intrinsic to these names and forms they do not process in intrinsic existence they borrow their existence from something else if they borrow their existence that is the very definition of falsity dependent existence hence like the Buddhists would say mutual dependence so because they are dependently existent hence they are false our original argument still stands even even if I admit to you the dream world exists only when I am dreaming the experience words exists in two times when I'm dreaming it and when I am not dreaming I am experiencing it and when I'm not experiencing it dream objects exist only when I am experiencing it when in dreams otherwise not when I am awake they don't exist but the waking world experiencing it when I'm sitting here in the hall and experiencing the Hall it exists and when I go away from the Hall it still exists we admit it temporarily will be soon so that we don't admit that also but temporarily we admit it yes near this distinction you have intelligently pointed out this distinction between waking and dreaming still our argument that the waking world is equally false stands because both are impermanent and we have shown impermanence is related to falsity that crucial link do you remember impermanence is related to falsity that impermanence means borrowed existence otherwise the thing would not be in permanent do you remember that logic so our logic still stands so this is the answer did you have a question yes there there are certain psychological conditions those things will come later why renunciation why transcending desire for worldly objects is considered important the reason is that as long as we take it to be valuable and nice its psychologically difficult to give up the belief that they are real logically one might might understand and sort of get it what they're trying to say but we will still continue to feel it's real and behave it's real and speak as if it's real because of our desires internally that will come later discussion will come later what are the practices later on yes impermanence of the world it's an experience nobody denies it what what part of the world is permanent no oh no what entity's permanent by permanent I mean unchanging or unborn and uh no birth no death absolutely steady steady state what everything's changing it everything changes is is born and is dies yes they exist all right even there that also is a door to Advaita existence is there right you're saying what existence is per minute you're saying existence itself is permanent let's Advaita Vedanta existence itself abstracted from the changing names and forms is what is called sucked do you follow what I just said this is being certainly this is permanent how can being become non being never but what turns is the world existence no it is existence plus other things names and forms and those names and forms are continuously changing that is what is meant by impermanent right do you see what are you sitting on are you sitting on existence no you are sitting on a chair which exists and the chair is certainly subject to change it can be produced it can be destroyed yes what exists the world changes in time time also changes yes that is true time flows but the world is not permanent because the world changes yes but the question about being existence tell me you just said all the objects in the world chair exist huh chair is man is woman is sky is this is what you mean by the world exists but these are changing chair is born and is created and destroyed man is born and dies woman is born and dies sky also one day the universe was created at one time it will go away they exist but only temporarily does the chair exist eternally have you ever made a met an eternal chair No obviously not the world by world do you mean what the universe we go to the Hayden Planetarium here and Neil deGrasse Tyson will tell you in his unique voice that the world universe was created so many billions of years ago before which it did not exist but what you are trying to say is there is a feeling of existence everywhere that existence is permanent this is ness you will see it is common there is a long discussion beautiful discussion we should do it once in the second chapter of the bhagavad-gita Oh God Gita it's coming very soon second chapter xvi verse nasa toe with dirt a hollow Navarro with deities at AHA the the Unreal never comes into existence and the real never goes out of existence the one who knows the distinction between these two that one truly knows so NASA toe with deity Baba and Shankar Acharya has a long discussion on this question of existence what is existence and what is its relation to things which exist anyway that's a different topic it'll take a long time but we will discuss it I think in a couple of classes will come upon that verse in the Gita class all right now till now guru father has not really pulled out the big guns I've told you what his real answer is earlier now I'll repeat it remember what is the question what what was the premise of the question the whole question is based on this idea that the waking world and the dream world are fundamentally different that which the dream world is something that exists in the mind and hence it cannot be real and the waking world is something that exists out there solid separate from the mind hence Israel now look at the logic in the mind not real that means only in the mind not real and out there and also in the mind when you see something out there that is real out there external to the mind real internal in the mind not real this was the question Ghora father says actually this distinction also we do not agree why consider in your dream remember in your dreams also dreams are not recognized as dreams during dreams during dreams how do you feel waiting you never feel I'm dreaming you feel I'm awake you don't even doubt it alright in your dreams there are things which you see outside and there are things which you think imagine feel inside when you wake up what happens both of them are equally unreal the division between existing outside and existing in the mind and therefore outside thing being real and mental thing being imaginary is an imaginary distinction proof your own dreams everything that you saw outside the person you saw outside the dog in the central part of the Central Park itself the lake itself outside real and I'm imagining something else a dog I saw somewhere else in say Los Angeles or something that's imaginary and this is real I was feeling that the moment I wake up and you know I was dreaming about it then the imagined dog in my mind and the real dog walking outside in the central court whole thing becomes a dream the distinction between internal imagined object external real object is erased both are seen to be projections in the mind this distinction does not hold if it does not hold in the dream world how do you know this will hold here also only thing is though the distinction in the dream world they are based on the mind dreamers mind here internal external differences they're based they will all the external world also becomes falsified when you realize yourself as pure consciousness hysteria when you awaken to that reality dream world is realized as false when you awaken from a dream into waking waking world is realized as false as relative truth as lower truth when you awaken to your real nature as the Torah as pure consciousness see what is happening now is which some ever we can sort of logically grasp what is being said here still it doesn't seem to be quite right or quite real to us why doesn't seem to be real we are have no objections when it comes to saying that the dream world is false why we can see the dream world from the vantage point of the real world so we can dismiss the dream world false but the real world is false with respect to not the real not the waking world it the waking world is false with respect to to the air which is right here but until we have a clear conception a clear realization of it then we see then all this logic makes sense we'll make it it's a fact because it's a part of our experience then we see clearly we see just as all the arguments showing that the dream world waking the dreams are false you don't need the arguments because you've already experienced the falsity of the dreams the arguments you immediately understand you you say ok they are thoughts similarly the arguments about the falsity of the waking world at most until you understand or realize that or iam until that point they will have a logical force but not a psychological force psychologically you will still feel this is real when you realize right here what the tour iam is apart from the experience of the Turia upon them from things which are experienced then all this logic again will become superfluous will clearly see all these are appearances interim in consciousness not an external reality experienced by consciousness not a world happening to consciousness but all of this is in consciousness and I am that consciousness that becomes an experience I mean it is an experience we have not recognized it yet yeah yes yes yes correct that is true and that is what advaitha is it's a change of paradigm it's a change of paradigm it's not going to any particular place but seeing it from the seeing the lower level of reality from the higher level of reality remember Advaita talks about three levels of reality or in your words three baselines one is param arctic the absolute reality which is searched on and or thorium the second one is via haruka and that's another term which I did not use relative reality falsity Swami Vivekananda's lower truth that is Vera haruka second baseline of real and the third the lowest is prati hosaka in appearance a rope snake a mirage or dreams illusions errors they're all appearances which we know to be false without any philosophy also right now we know them to be false yes yes you don't when you compare so for example when you compare no you did for example the new computer experiences you compare it reality to the false for example when you compare a cookie which you have eaten with a cookie which you dream dreamt of eating you don't consider them equally at all will you say that I had a cookie while I was awake and three cookies in my dream so total I have over over got my sugar quota I've had four cookies today no you don't because you recognize those three cookies or appearances and they're not to be counted along with the way cookie in the waking state why are they not to be counted because they belong to a lower baseline of reality lower baseline of reality is a polite word of saying falsity there are three false cookies and one waking real cookie the waking cookie along it alone is to be curved but luckily from Turiya point of view you need not count the waking cookie also to the make your doctor infuriated yeah okay good and we are getting somewhere let me just or we have run out of time but let me just read the next verse because we have done it actually earlier and we I will not I'll just translate it and leave it that so this distinction between mental existences like dreams and awaking world outside this distinction is not accepted both are false one is false from the waking state the other one is false from the point of view of tedium of course both are false from the point of view of thorium 15 we have done this earlier abierta Ava a hunters to be octa a by a antis to spot a voce a BA he vote on a virtue a BA he called PETA Avett a survey culpa telepathy serve a vicious twin reenter a vicious twin reenter e the opponent comes forward with another related objection trying to say that external things are real and mental things are false but this objection is weaker than the earlier one the objection is that look things which you see outside are real crisp and well-defined things which you imagine inside are vague just see this object which you see so clear if you've got your glasses on so it's so clear and well-defined now close your eyes and try to imagine the same object in your mind it will be vague and lacking in detail so that's an imagination it's not real and this is real again a weak argument because why because the same thing applies in your dreams also you will see precisely clarified clear objects outside and when you're thinking inside about those objects will be vague and ill-defined inside and when you wake up both these things hanging outside and your thoughts in the dream all of them are dreamed it didn't happen they were not there so this distinction between external clarity and internal vagueness that ceases vitiation to in reentry it depends on the nature of the instrument which you are using if you use eyes in waking or in dreams you will see clear forms if you use imagination in waking orden dream you see a vague outline of something a very accurate approximation of something but that does not make it any more real external thing is not real because it's clear and internal thing is not false because it's far it's big both are false because not because of clarity or vagueness not because they're internal external because they are objects of consciousness because they are strictly temporary impermanent good then we will go on next time another interesting question will be asked next time that alright here you are let's forget the absolute consciousness for the time being here you are the subject and here is the world your object which is first subject or object you are saying the pure consciousness projects on each water projects them both the individual experiencer and they experienced the conscious experience are in the material experienced objects so which one is produced first is asking which is first in the universe the universe itself are the consciousness because you are non duelists every scientist would say what would a scientist say scientists who say universe the material universe is created first and then in a tiny planet in the corner of the universe very simple forms of material combine together to form organic materials and they evolve into very simple forms of life and ultimately millions and millions of years later very sophisticated forms of living matter matter generate what is called consciousness so consciousness is much later and the material universe is first Vedanta would give you'll see the very nuanced answer one answer is what you said but that's the secondary answer the real answer is yeah exactly there is no order to it think you begin to understand what God or father will do if you know one trick he will refer everything back in this chapter to to dreams in dreams what is produced first you the dreamer or the object of dream world both they both immediately appear in you the dreamers mind the real point is there is neither that world not the person who's experiencing that world both are appearances in the dreamers mind here the Jeeva the sentient being and the universe with the Jeeva experiences both are appearances in consciousness and you are that consciousness not that particular being who's experiencing this world so you know god of others answer if you know any deity dream example and you will see it works perfectly all right today if you see the picture there Swami Abaddon and the Gees birthday Swami Abed Ananda yes it's coming next Sunday I mean I'm going to talk about it today the birthday Swami a bit down in this birthday second third October 3rd October yesterday was Gandhiji's birthday so this is Sami Abed Ananda one of the Dalek disciples of Sri Ramakrishna who's who is very important to us here because though the vivek vedanta society was created by swami vivekanand 125 years ago 1894 but it is abaddon and the who nurtured it for 20 years he was he worked here in the united states so it's his birthday today auspicious day Oh Shanti Shanti Shanti hey hurry he owned that Sri Ramakrishna Oh funny thing which occurred to me I forgot to tell you when I saw the term twin timed this duo kala actually in English it can be translated as to timing to to timer means a fraud a deception so the very Englishness it's a very happy translation that's what actually Godfather wants to say the world is - it's a two-timer which means it is false