Video 38

39. Mandukya Upanishad | Chapter 3 Karika 15-16

alright let us start with the the Shanti mantra Oh Bertram Karan efficient Aoyama Deva bhadram posh a moksha period Etra staring eyes - dragons Aston OBE via she Madiba hittin yada Yahoo s Weston Andhra Pradesh rava swass Tina pooja Vishwa Veda ozpin a star show air Astana me SWA spin Aubry hospital Dada - own shanti shanti shanti cinnamon Duque open assured man Dokic Erica we are doing the third chapter the Advaita pressure on the chapter on non duality here the subject is goda pas de bourree pas de acharya the author of the Carrie cos remember this text is a three layer text and the core is the Upanishad itself which belongs to the atharvaveda guru pod is not the author or anything like that and then around that it is a goda pada about 1500 years ago composed these verses called karika in four chapters so that's written around the opposition the first chapter includes the Upanishad itself the opposition is embedded in the first chapter and around it go to par the wrote four chapters of these verses and the third layer is the commentary of Shankar Acharya who is written a commentary on the Upanishad and the verses also so usually - studied together we call it mandu kyoka Rica in the third chapter God our Father wants to talk about the non duality of the self when we talk about non duality we keep saying non duality but what does it mean it means that there is one reality and no second reality apart from it the ultimate reality is one and there is no second reality apart from it and that ultimate reality is you as our over our essential reality is that ultimate reality that's the meaning of the famous openness on the equation Atman is Brahman Atman means our reality Brahman is that one non dwell non dual reality of this universe and this grand theme guru pada wants to prove in this third chapter with the help of reason and argument and back it up with with upanishadic sources with references from the Upanishads why references from the Upanishads because after all what is Vedanta Vedanta is the philosophy based on the Upanishads so guru pada he's not going to claim that it's his invention or anything like that but so he's going to he's right now we are at that stage at the beginning if you remember guru father introduced the example of the sky and the pot and showing that the the so called space inside the pot the pot space is actually not born it's an appearance it's an error it seems to be different from the external space but really the space with there is no such thing as a separate space within the pot it's an illusion created by the existence of the pot what does it what does that want what is he showing there there is no such separate thing as an individual being like us our if we investigate ourselves we come to one reality which is existence consciousness bliss yet we appear to be different just as a space within a pot appears to be different from the space outside and appears to be different from from the space in other parts and it can be used as such and you can say I'm using it for storing milk or water or there is clay in this and so on so forth it is used in different ways it is given different labels you say something is pure or impure good or bad all those labels can be applied all those transactions can be carried on but the fact doesn't change that there is one unbroken space in all the pots similarly the fact is we are one undivided existence consciousness bliss not separate beings we may act as separate beings and we are called by different names and all the labels that we apply good and bad happy and sad healthy and diseased they all apply to thee to the what I call the adjunct since technically you body to the body mind so when you say non-dual there are two meanings one is that the Jeeva sentient beings are not second real a second third or four millions or billions reality apart from Brahman we are all that one Brahman first second meaning of non-duality is even the universe is physical universe in front of us including our bodies and our minds these are also not second reality apart from Brahman non duality of the Jeeva Jeeva mean sentient being we are not a second apart from Brahman hence non dual non duality of the universe geography the universe is also not a second thing apart from Brahman now the juego de pada wants to put this is in the language of causality causality what is the language of causality the way religion is normally taught or science or anything causal it is a basic principle of reasoning and that's how we reason in the world is that there is some reality called God and God is the creator of two things the individual us and the world the universe this is our religion is taught so God is the cause and these are the effects really an individual or in universe really these are produced by God this is how to start this is dual dualism Dwight er what we have just said non-dualism literally means if there is no second thing called an individual apart from God if there is no second thing called a universe apart from God then this clearly they are experiencing individuals there's no doubt about that not advaitha does not deny that you are experiencing it but what otherwise the questions is the reality of what you are experiencing and we don't question that if somebody saw a snake but we are questioning did you really see a snake or are you mistaking a rope for a snake you don't question that you see the sky as blue but what we's question in physics is is is the sky really blue or is it an optical illusion created by the scattering of light similarly what Godfather is saying is that it is not true that the universe and the individuals are effects created by God they there is only one non dual reality appearing as a dualistic universe if these are not effects if these are not effects that non dual reality alone is appearing as these in that case God is also not because if it has not produced anything if it really there is no individual which has been produced if really no universe has been produced if you ask the rope you take the rope to court and say why did you become a snake the roof will say what when I never became a snake it's your problem you made a mistake for your confusion why are you blaming me only confusion is in between these two confusion legal gives rise to cause and effect relationship so if God did not produce an individual or the universe if nothing is born of God cut rope initial nothing change our thing nothing is born of God then God is not a cause also it's not a cause if this is not an effect God is not a cause so the ultimate reality non duality is beyond cause and effect beyond causality what I'm saying is in the third chapter God a power wants to prove the non duality of Brahman and the approach has taken is to show that that Brahman is beyond causality if something is beyond causalities neither cause nor effect first you show that the effect is you cannot deny that the effect is experienced but what you can question is is it a reality is it a separate reality no sit-outs at all is it a separate reality no if the effect is not a separate reality then the cause is not a real cause you can say it's the basis for that illusion of the effect it's a basis for the appearance of the effect the rope is the basis for the appearance of the snake but it did not rope never really produced a snake rope is not really a cause of a real snake so what God APOD has done is by showing that non dual reality is beyond causality using the language of causality he has proved non-duality he used an example that is the pot sky example then he went on to show that taking various quotations from the scriptures from the Upanishads that what he is saying is supported by the Upanishads and that's what we were doing last time we should saw a quotation from real our yoke upon assured and one from tight area open Ishod a mother brahmana manned then one from dated open assured all right so let's go on now with the pot and sky example and with the opening shots he has shown that really the Jeeva the individual being is not a product of Brahman what is the individual being what are we we are Brahman we are Brahman though we appear to be different from Brahman though we are called by some names that are Jeeva individual being though we behave and indeed believe that we are different from Brahman a gold necklace might as well believe that I'm a gold I'm a necklace I am NOT gold a wave might believe that oh there is something called water but anyway I'm right now I am away I'm not water similarly we are under the error that we are not that we are not Brahmin whatever this Brahmin is whatever it is I am NOT that it would be nice to be Brahmin but I am NOT what can I do I'm trying my best but I'm not it's it's like the wave saying that if I could be water it would be nice but right now I'm aware I'm not really water also how much effort does the wave have to put in to become water nothing all the effort isn't it necessary to clear up the delusion the error that it is not water similarly how much effort do we have to put in to become Brahman the non-dual reality nothing all the effort there is effort all the effort is to be directed towards creating to towards removing the delusion the error that I am NOT Brahman in the simple direct language of the monks in the Himalayas they put it this way what is the gap between what is the difference between the distance between you and Brahman is the distance physical distance you have to go somewhere heaven by country about of Vishnu kailasha the abode of Shiva we have to go know is the distance between you and Ramon one of time you have to wait until death after death I will find after look at the words after space the word is there not there here time word is after so after death every life I in Brahman is it like that I'm not very sure let me ask you it often happens people say that even the example the way when what an example people say that yeah it's a wave but after the wave subsides it will become water no no of course not right now it is water yes yeah no they don't right right you don't prove it they don't prove it in the sense of a logical proof no these are like arguments based on Scripture and analogy but the reference is see if it was not a matter of our personal experience all of these would be just nice theories and scriptural claims and good examples but the greatest thing is what he's claiming this is the most important thing what he is claiming it's a matter of our most vital intimate experience right now right now let me complete the thought you will see whatever what I'm driving at there he's saying that I'll tell you what the sadhu said in Hindi but first the build-up so is it that you have to go somewhere to become Brahman no do you have to wait for some time to become Roman after death after the dissolution of the universe so these are all backed up by shooties their opening statements before all of this this was one reality before chandogya upanishad says all this was pure existence before before what we not the weight is normally said straight away before the universe was created so after the universe will be destroyed maybe a Big Crunch everything will become one reality so we have to wait till the end of that no after no no after no after after Samadhi spiritual let's begin bring it down to spiritual after after nearly culpa Samadhi or after the Divine Mother appears before or Sri Ramakrishna then only they are Brahman no right now you know it or do you do not know it when Sal used to teach us the mano Jana Jana Jana whether you know it or you do not know it mano ya na mano whether you accept it you do not accept it Toma Hyrum you are Rama so tum here on I still remember him he's a huge man he's sitting there I was sitting at his feet he looked down and he chuckled and he said he said in hindi chaya mahatma gee buddy ulti that shown here this is a very contradictory philosophy isn't it you owe your you are God you are Rama whether you accept it or not whether you understand it or not so it's not something to be distance between you and Brahman is not space okay distance between you and Brahman is not time distance between you and Brahman is open this is Vedantic reasoning distance between you and Brahman is not object also what I need my object is I am one thing now and Ramon is another thing somehow to become that and human I have to become divine is it that it's like the way of saying I'm a wave I have to become water no no the distance between you and Brahman is not object also I'm translating from the Sanskrit deja kala was to their sha means space kala means time was to means object the difference between you and groom and the distance between you and Brahman is not in space is not in time is not an other you and the other know then what is the distance here right and yet you may say so I mean I don't feel that I'm Roman right now it's nowhere in my experience or understanding in what is the difference ignorant is the polite term sada who said apnea Brahma me counter he gave album CUFI math magic only stupidity he says only stupidity is the distance between you and Brahman what is the difference between you and Brahman neither space nor time nor object only foolishness confusion is the difference between you and Brahman ignorant is a very philosophical determined why it has not happened it's like the wave asking the way of asking why did it happen all this is fine but tell me why did it happen that I became a wave I was water it was fine but now why do we think it happened because of confusion but if you say why is the confusion there there's no why in confusion the only thing they say is when you say when you begin come to this point that if you begin to accept it might be confusion it might be error then what they suggest is the teachers don't ask why anymore remove the confusion there in the words they used Vedanta teachers say this again cause topic Mosquitia again coca tea don't try to establish ignorant try to cut down ignorance right that's what we're trying to find out if so also we will find out yes yeah so this is where we are at now let's go ahead now the next thing is going to do is the Upanishads we have already shown by other open Ishod like arguments or opening statements that you and brahman are the same we saw in the bravery unaccompanied shirt and the tie teary open assured now remember one more thing is there that not only you are not different from Brahman but the universe is also not different from Roman Brahman did not produce an universe that's what we are also saying there's no separate universe also world also if that is so then the question arises and open I should also say this cotterpin t-shirt says nahan on a stick in Jannah there is no plurality here whatsoever we are seeing plurality here see and yet the opening shot asserts there is really no plurality here at whatsoever there's only one Ness if this is so now the question at this point is wait a minute aren't you quoting selectively there are many passages in the opening shots which talk about the production of the universe creation of the universe Brahman as the cause universe as the effect there are many many passages what about that why aren't you quoting those you're just quoting selectively things which which support you but the universe is not created that only Bremen exists so let's look at the objection raised and the answer a very powerful answer is given we are now on verse number 15 15 chapter 3 so what what is he going to show he's going to take up he's going he wants to show that the open Ishod support his contention that no universe was ever produced by brahman and he takes it up by showing those passages which seem to talk about the production of the universe creation of the universe why what are those passengers and why do they say that 15 maloja wishful engorge a mellow harvest fooling day 3 stereo Judy Tenuta Shree stereo Judy Tenuta oopah so Vitara oopah so Vitara nasty Vedic attention nasty Veda cotton channel in those various passages where creation of the universe which T a projection of the universe has been talked about there are passages like it he just indicates so you have to really know your opening shuts forward and backward to understand what he means the what he just said is by the examples of clay sparks iron clay iron sparks Shrishti creation of the universe has been spoken of variously in various ways why oopah because it's a way of teaching non-duality avatar io means so that non duality will dawn upon us it's a very beautiful way of putting it avatar here does not mean krishna rama or it means non duality will descend upon us our dawn upon us and this is as an opah a method of teaching nasty vedic attention in reality there is no difference whatsoever all right let's break this up and see what he means that will let me quickly refer to the passages he has talked about there are three examples in the chandogya upanishad in the chandogya upanishad it says pure existence alone existed and then from that came this universe just as one clay appears as many pots and the pots are nothing but different names and shapes but they are the clay alone in the same way there is only one existence which appears as this entire universe with different names and forms and further all Shwetha k2o son or disciple that one existence you are taught to Amma see that thou art then he takes up another example just as one piece of gold appears as multiple ornaments with various names and shapes similarly that one existence appears as all the things of this universe with different names and shapes and that one existence you are oh Sh wait ok - thud - Amma see that thou art again just as one piece of iron appears as many iron instruments like nail cut as he actually refers to nail cutters in the chandogya upanishad knockin increment honor nail cutters literally and it's around three to four thousand years old not surprising people would need nail cut from the very beginning of history so as iron appears as various instruments like the nail cutters but it's the same iron under different names and shapes similarly one existence alone is there which appears as this entire universe with all names and shapes and that one existence is you or Shwetha Cato that Thomas e that thou art so this is the example but what the questioner is interested in is aa but from clay pots have come isn't it that's what the opener shod said from iron iron nail cutters have come from gold ornaments have come and so the open e should said from pure being existence the universe has come Upanishad says that so why are you saying that nothing has been produced whatsoever that's the question the other example is from the Mundaka Upanishad the example of the sparks all he just says sparks the example of the sparks is guitar Sudeep todd power card Prabhavati sahasrara will be spooling are preventing us russia as from a well kindled fire blazing bonfire thousands of sparks emanate similarly all this universe has emanated from the imperishable reality from rahman the questioner says wait look at that what did it say it is emanated it has come so it has come like sparks from the you from the source and you can multiply such examples it's there in many many Punishers tied teary open assured I'll quote it and translate the smart ba8 a smart man aha from that Atman which is the same as Brahman Akasha some boot space appeared Akasha value from space came air Y or Agni from air comes fire Agni raha from fire comes water I'd be a pretty be he from water comes the earth and so on so look again the questioner says look he just come the five elements out of which the universe is built has come from this Brahmin Upanishad directly sees it how much more than it can it get another in the Mundaka Upanishad it itself it is there your torna now the shreya Tigran her teacher at our Appetit be emotion is somehow aunty authoritative Purusha cash alimony Natasha rod some poverty her wish from a very poetic and beautiful description very ancient three four thousand years ago as from a spider emerges and is withdrawn the web as from the earth emerged herbs and shrubs as from a living human body emerges hair and nails similarly from that imperishable reality emerges this universe and our question is saying look it says it has emerges come so that imperishable reality is a cause it's God and here is a universe which been produced and so duality not non duality causality is there is not a non duality so I mentioned this earlier the spider example indologist mistook it i remember reading a well-known in dollar british intelligence who writes the ancient hindus worshipped a spider now didn't worship a spider it says yatta just like as an example I mean all across temples you'll find all sorts of things there are there are fish and elephants and whatnot lions and such snakes but not a spider strangely enough but so it's an example so what's the answer then this is the question so what is the answer all the openings many of the open so to speak about this creation so what's the answer the answer is in the second line oppa one word oh by this is this is a method this is a technique a technique of showing non duality how do you know it's a technique because very same Upanishads after speaking about creation then they denied the whole thing altogether and say there's only one reality nothing ever was produced nothing ever was destroyed it's that one reality alone alone appearing as many so what is this technique what is this technique it's called a dro Papa vada I mentioned it earlier superimposition and Dee superimposition it's a way of teaching us because we our minds are so set in duality in subject object in causality directly if you say there's oneness obviously there is no one as well as oneness you'll have to be sure we'll have to be shown that there is oneness and this showing us takes steps if you remember a / auction of Ooty when we concluded it at the end this this was thought that there is a method which is followed in ad weight of a rant at the heart of the advaithic methodology at the heart of Advaitic material a methodology is this it's called superimposition disapper imposition first you accept what people take for granted and then lead them into what you want to show them accept the duality which people take for granted accept the causality something creates something and then take them into non duality then take them beyond causality so the example if you remember very nice example was given in a peroxy an abuti what was the example standard clay pot example we start with the idea here is a pot and that seems to be obvious to us what does the what what do I want to prove to that person that actually it is clay and nothing other than clay so from part vision to clay vision how will you take that person so first he is told yes it's a pot I agree with you it's a pot and I am introducing something that the pot is an effect it's an effect it's a product it's created behind it it at its source is a cause cause means a material cause the material out of which it is produced what is the material cause of pot that question we'll come to that person's mind or really what is that I am Dino the pot but you're saying that it's produced it's an effect it's a modification it's a creation from what from something called clay so now you have two pot and clay caused by cause I mean material cause effect material cause means the material out of which something is produced oopah Donna Karan um in Sanskrit so cause and effect this is stage one will have four stages stage one what is stage one introduced the cause stage to stage two is let him find out the cause where is the cause right now he thinks there is a cause and an effect what is the effect of one which I'm holding now pot and there's a cause clay now stage two please examine the effect pot Oh what you're touching is clay inside when you touch it it's clay the top is clay the bottom is clay in fact the effect is pervaded through went through by the cause clay it is clay and clay alone right so you have found that the clay the because is imminent in the effect it is there right there in the effect third third stage you find there is no such thing as an effect at all where is the effect no such thing as an effect the thing is the clay are you with me third stage now I ask that person where is the pot so here no that's clay you just admitted it's clay what you're holding is clay but your touching is clay what is the way it is clays wait where is the thing called a pot part is a name I agree with you their part is a shape so alright name and shape but the name and shape do they have any independent existence apart from the clay no does the pot have any existence of its own apart from the clay no the part cannot exist in the in the air without the clay the clay is the one which has existence the clay is the one which has substantiality the clay is the one which you are holding the clay is the one which makes the pot possible without the clay you cannot give it the name part without the clay you cannot even use it as a pot name form transaction which is the very material of transactional reality of America they are all dependent on clay and the reality is clay itself third stage we are we show that there is no such thing reality I'm using the word stressing the word thing as thought the thing is clay alright see already magic pot has disappeared is holding it this or her pot has disappeared now thought last if there is no such thing called pot there's no such thing called an effect then the causality of the clay disappears remember clay does not disappear clay is there but it's not a cause it didn't produce anything you cannot call it a cause because it didn't produce anything hence the causality the effect itself disappears and the causality of the cause disappears the clay remains as neither cause nor effect so wow this is really something like now you apply to Bremen and the universe like the pot here is the universe and we agree yes universe now put it through the four stages this is a Dro Popova then you agree that it's a universe you have superimposed it put it to the four stages you are told there is a cause of the universe God created or Brahman saguna brahman the creator of the universe God is the creator Brahman is the creator oh okay stage 1 stage 2 find the cause where is the cause right here look in all things of the universe you find it as is Ness existence sucked look at yourself neither body nor mind beyond that consciousness which is also existence go to third stage does the end does anything the universe have any reality apart from easiness it's only name and form plus isness name and form plus is nesset self is the reality only one thing like the clays out there and the universe when you examine the isness if you get a feel for that if you get a feel for that you will realize the easiness is you yourself only difference is this that isness is not there in the chair to understand this I'll give you a hint if you examine all the things that you see in your dreams their existence is whose existence actually your exist in the dreamers existence the dreamer is nowhere in the dream dreamer is safe the person in the dream is the dream person but the one the waking person who is on the bed who is shut-eye and dreaming that person is not there neither the bed is there not is this the snoring person on is there in the dream but it's that person's mind which is the fundamental existence of the entire dream everything in the dream is that person spine similarly the easiness of the entire universe is you sucked then you ask does this universe have any existence apart from that isness cannot logically apart from isness is not so universe has no existence apart from sucked if the effect has no existence then is that such a cause it's not a cause it is just sucked beyond cause and effect then that suck you cannot call it God saguna brahman you have to call it near guna brahman to non-dual Brahman and you are left with near guna Brahman who is that ninguna Brahman already have realised you are that this is called a D ro Papa vada yes don't bring it bring the pattern in your complicating the you see what I understand the question I also had this doubt earlier I always like the snake-rope example but not the claypot example why because the clay has been made into a pot somebody put in effort to make it into various kinds of parts so that was is playing in my mind but that's also you see that's why I teacher is required that's also because our attention is always on the name and shape and function what the Upanishad wants to say if you look at the original text of definition very interesting it easy to make miss what the open is chandogya upanishad what it wants to say is this as far as essential reality goes there's no difference between pot and clay it's saying that mythic I Tara Satyam the only reality there is the pot is the clay only reality in the pot is the clay not the name not the form what the partner has done not the shape because they don't have any reality apart from that so the Potters work is completely ignored there because what the Upanishad wants to prove is the reality of inherent in the product not the process of producing something right so that's what the Punisher is stressing upon our minds are so fixed on this is called Maya our minds are so fixed on name form and function immediately where is the jeweler where is the Potter in the way of a notion will often ask me the wind is producing waves isn't so that is that is immaterial it's true but it is immaterial there that's not what we are looking for we are saying what is the reality of that thing so the reality of that thing it's what I always said what did I say aparna karana what you're asking Potter is called nemeth the karana the efficient cause the person who transformed or did something to the clay and made it into a part that part of the example is not to be taken so this is the thing that's why teacher is necessary otherwise example is also misunderstood the only way see these Rishi's have realized this truth and they're using several arguments and examples to help us catch it they are not trying to prove it mathematically it cannot be done you have to catch it within yourself but for that little guidance is required to open up the knots where it happens to open it up this is an example of superimposition d superimposition hold on to the questions I've given this these examples earlier for example the student who came to the teacher and said please teach me how to teach me about space what is space I don't understand space do you remember that example I gave it once and the teacher said space here space the student looks around and says what the garden no no beyond that the fence no no no beyond that the forest the teacher said mmm okay I get it difficult case so he said stay with me and stay in the ashram and I'm giving you work in the garden plant these sunflowers and tend to them your duty is morning and evening you meditate and do everything and your work is you prepare the ground so the seeds and what are the plants and so months passed by and the sunflower plants are quite big grow quite tall so tall and nice sunflowers are there and the whole front of the ashram is covered it sunflower you can hardly see anything beyond then one day in the morning the teacher says to the student student today stop don't water the plants take this sickle and cut all the plants all of them fast fast do it do it quick quick quick and the student works and works and works and finally finishes and the teacher says look space it's all cleared up and the students is oh I see now the point is not in the sunflowers neither in creating the sunflowers nor in cutting down the sunflowers it is to reveal what was already there but we can't see it because of my ignorance that is ignorance that is in the words of the teacher Bo Kofi confusion foolishness because of my foolishness I couldn't see it that was removed by this process there is a definition in a Vedanta service a definition of a dro Pappa vada it is mish preppin jump propensity that which is beyond this material universe that is explained it's so subtle we can't catch it that is explained by this method of superimposition de superimposition one more example this is a nice one I haven't given this earlier so there's this man who is a rich man and when he died he passed his property which mainly consisted of the elephants he owned to his children and people did own elephant I don't know even nowadays some maybe still do in India people did own elephants it was it was seen as a mark of wealth status because it's a huge expense and it's no good to you so if you can afford to keep an elephant then you must be a really rich person you're throwing away all your money it eats a lot that means to to keep an elephant this is a phrase in many Indian languages which means a wasteful look even in English a white elephant it's a big government project Mitchel eats up from money and it's not productive so it's a sign of status I remember I remember some some monasteries also maintained elephants big monasteries so I remember one monk a traditional monk came to meet our Abbot when I became a brahmacari a novice monk came this was India in India at that time and later we heard of the discussion of this visiting monk with our head who was the head of our Russia the first thing that monk at establish he wants to show his superior to over our Swami how many elephants do you own and Swami said we have some cows in the ashram but no elephants and the monk said well I have four or five now listen to me so because he I'm superior I've got five elephants you don't have any and then so at the most you can maybe take it out for a ride sometimes and nothing else you can do it an elephant you can pull out the sunflowers yes now this man he passed his and his will to three sons he passed on the elephants he had he had seventeen elephants the classic story he had seventeen elephants and in the well he said the first son eldest son gets half of it unfair I know but he gets the second son gets one third and the third son gets one ninth one ninth of Delphine's and of course you can't cut the elephants but that's impossible how can you have half of 17 elephants how can you indeed have one-third of 17 elephants or even one ninth of 17 a defense so they're scratching their heads thinking what to do how do you divide the dad's property and elephants must have been grinning you know looking at them and then they're his dad's friend a neighbor who's also very rich he comes along on his elephant and riding and so he says this is the problem they says uncle what do we do so don't worry I'll just I'll help you out I donate my elephant to you it's still sitting on the elephant I'm donate my elephant to you now divide your property now you have 18 elephants so the first one gets nine the second he gets half so now nine is half of 18 the second son gets one third which is six one third of 18 so a six plus nine is 15 and the third son gets one ninth this is two one ninth of 18 so he gets two elephants so you have 9 plus 6 plus 2 which is 17 elephants and they are it's all divided and this man says now I take my elephant back problem solved you didn't even get down from the elephant elephant introduced problem shot elephant withdrawn similarly the whole thing about creation of the universe introduced you realize who you are I am Brahman with creation Vedran so this is a dr Opa Opa vada superimposition and Dee super impressed advocate of superimposition and Dee superimposition just a method all this to explain the word Opa Opa Rio means a method now you understand what is this what does this method do so avatar IO so that the avatar means a descent so that the this we intuitively grasp non-duality we grasp a Humber of us me because if brahman has not produced the universe or an individual being then I who appeared to be an individual being I must be Brahman right now and this universe which appears to be a multi various a pluralistic universe must be in depth that one existence right now and I am that existence so this is the reason such passages are given in there Upanishads you have some questions yeah also one more hold onto the question one more thing underneath are Jovita gorup are the points out the shooties the open he should speak of this creation notice in how many different ways they speak about it creation of the five elements the mundo company mundo coop initial creator speaks about creation as waking universe dream universe causal universe the theory open assured speaks about it as the creation of space and air and fire and water and earth and so on the chandogya upanishad talks about creation of three elements try to do open each of the five elements Shankaracharya makes a comment there he says question is raised which is the correct theory of creation Big Bang Theory or steady state steady state universe which is the correct theory he says none of them are are meant to be description of the correct theory of the universe they are all meant to point you back to the one reality theories there is no real universe to talk about what to talk about a correct theory these are all techniques very interesting point this is whenever the open e shirts talk about creation they're not interested in the creation we are showing you a way to go back to the reality which is your reality and the reality of the universe yes yes direct experience can be trusted yes because even to doubt it you need it for example everything can be doubted you have you heard of the project of Descartes he started the French philosopher mathematician Rennes Endicott she started by saying that how can I put all knowledge on firm foundations so let me start by doubting whatever can be doubted and where did he stop where did he stop thought I exist how cosy torgeson my own existence cannot be doubted because I am thinking even to doubt you have to admit that that the thought itself is there Vedanta goes a little deeper the thought itself might disappear deep sleep right but both the presence and absence of thought are noted illumined experienced therefore there must be an experiencer not and not an inference at first it seems to an inference it's a lot of experience is going on there must be something experiencing it or sometimes the absence of experience is also noted deep sleep Samadhi what we call unconsciousness coma both the presence and absence of entities experienced they mean that there must be an experiencer of the presence and absence it sounds like an inference but if you follow it carefully it's not an inference it's a pointing to something which is always direct and uncontradicted how can you contradict it if you contradict it if you doubt it you are reaffirming it that is the only thing that cannot be doubted why what can be doubted what can be doubted logically anything that you experience can be doubted anything that you speculate about can be doubted but that which experiences or speculates that cannot be doubted why to doubt it that also must be there do not doubt it also that must be there is a very deep point in fact if you know it you will understand up great as a philosophy and if we try to feel it you will become an enlightened person right here and now that is the door to enlightenment there's the door to understanding Advaita the core of added weight of intellectually and that's also the door to enlightenment all try to doubt your own existence the question is by what proof is this Atman known if you put it in and then actually in Indian philosophy these are very precisely defined they say for to claim anything you must justify it on what basis are you claiming epistemology how do you justify your knowledge claims this is the philosophical language how do I justify my knowledge claims you must have some source of knowledge these sources of knowledge are called brahmana brahmana brahmanas source of knowledge don't look so puzzled you are using it all the time right now you're using a pramana ears and eyes and smell and taste and touch sense organs direct perception one pramada inference which we use in our day-to-day activities and almost all of science is based on that what is science observations and inference based on that inference on whom on another pramana and when you say Shruti Upanishad is a brahmana many people misunderstand oh you are supposed to believe it because that's how scriptures are treated in religions but in in Vedanta the scriptures are not meant for believing they are meant as pointers to see the pointing out something meant for you to get it you can believe it to begin with because otherwise will not make progress Shraddha is necessary but then you use it to point continuously because the thing is available if it was something in heaven something after death something later on then you have to go on belief until that thing happens until you go to heaven or whatever but if it is continuously present right now always available all you need is pointing either you know it in which case you are enlightened or you don't know it in which case and not enlighten all you need is a pointing out little clear the error so the question is now the question is what is the proof what pramana what pramana what what sorts of proof is there for such an such an entity called of pure consciousness or Brahman the answer is very interesting nope Ramana can point to it it's unknown weight but all pramanas depend on it for functioning thinking hearing smelling tasting understanding not understanding remembering forgetting all of it takes place in that existence consciousness which we are calling Brahman or Toria try to remove that from the equation you will see the universe will disappear into darkness all right I'll leave it at that now I just let me quote from shankara's Shankara has a nice commentary here let me just go to one line and then go ahead I'll quote the Sanskrit and then translate just one sentence this is Shankar Acharya commentary on the fifteenth verse maloja spooling gaudy drish tanta open yas a stereo Rita Prakash cheetah Anita Anita just saw service reciprocal Jeeva Paramatma a cut to a booty avatar ayah o pious Markham all these examples which are given in the opening shots example of clay gold gold is not mentioned you were to introduce it gold iron sparks all these examples which are given variously notice if the open assured was trying to explain how the universe was really produced why would they give multiple differing differing accounts then the question will arise which one is true but the open ocean is not interested in finding out through a count of the creation of the universe because it was not truly created at all from the opening for interview so all of these various he says onion onion note that they all differ from each other it's not a defect it points to the real purpose of definition not to develop a cosmology not to give a scientific account of the origin of the universe no rather to point out what Jeeva Paramatma occurred to a body the enlightenment about the oneness of the individual and the ultimate reality the individual is not an individual the ultimate reality is not God it is one non dual Brahman to point that out who by us Markham it is a method for us a path for us a technique for us a related question is taken up next sixteenth verse why are so many practice this is the thing non duality is like the real teaching many people ask this that's a good good verse why are so many practices dualistic practices taught who pass an armory sure I says different kinds of worship meditations and rituals do puja like this meditate like that do japa pranayama so many activities images and forms and mantras and they're all dualistic so why are they taught and what good are they shouldn't everybody be told that you are Brahman take up everybody should sit with a pot and think about it deeply and that's it finished realize what I'm clay I'm clay no not clay I am Brahman but that's what will hand end up happening if you try it straightaway I am clear I've been taught I'm clay so why are these dualistic forms taught at all by the Phoenicians and the most religions are full of dualistic forms temples and churches and different kinds of rituals prayers prayers rituals meditations they're all dualistic of them at least so why answer ashram Ostrava da Hina ashram Ostrava tahina madam Oh Trish Trish taya madam Oh Krishna Estrella OOP Asano per diem OOP Arsenal per diem Domino compile the data Manu compile why add all these techniques been taught guru father says because there are three classes of spiritual seekers Hina he says the most mediocre the lowest madama the middling and with Krishna the superior ash Rama there is called say mush Rama now the Sanskrit word Asuma might create confusion because the Sanskrit word ashram refers to the four stages of life Brahma cherry ash from the student ship youth Greece - Rama householder life when you have a career or a family and so on and so forth one a pasta when you retire from active in involvement with the world and sannyasa when you become a well you give up the world among a spiritual seeker so four stages of life let us say four stages of life these are called ash Rama another meaning of ashram is of course a monestery like this is an option but none of these are meant here what is meant here art there are three classes of spiritual seekers the inferior the middling and the superior and he says Drishti Oh on what basis are you classifying Drishti their their worldview their ability their their their philosophical penetration what they can take their of different categories they are not the same since they are not the same there are a different stage of spiritual evolution all of them will attain enlightenment eventually but the teaching has to be different otherwise it won't take so for that reason a variety of practices are given now what are these three categories gota bother does not mention and unfortunately Shankaracharya simply says they have different levels of insight and for them various practices are given luckily however just yesterday we were studying the gospel of sri ramakrishna a very interesting portion dr. Mahendra not Sarkar who is very scientific minded person he dislikes one thing he's very spiritual in his own way but he dislikes first of all dislikes rituals and he also does not quite like the Avatara idea and he does not like people worshipping Shri Ramakrishna as an avatar of an incarnation so he says to stratum o Krishna why do you allow people to touch your feet and you know what shape you like that and he says look he's told em and many others are standing right there there's another doctor too he's saying no he's a nice person he's a good person but you're all spoiling him just calling him God and things like that you're just turning the head of a nice person that's the thing he says then M the writer of the gospel comes forward to defend Shri Ramakrishna sitting quietly as not saying anything and says no otherwise the devotees weep you know they feel bad they want to touch his feet and call him God so the doctor says well that's their mistake they should be told that then M comes up in to see three answers you'll come up with none of which really stick the second answer M comes up with is no no no you see God dwells in everybody he knows the doctor believes in that God dwells in everybody God is in the hearts of everybody and the doctor says in that case you should take the dust of everybody's feet why only his/her feet then M comes forth forth with a third argument he says yes but our God is not equally revealed in all beings so meaning thereby he is maximally revealed in a very spiritual person like Sri Ramakrishna so it's all right to take the dust of his feet touch to his feet and call him God or whatever doctor is not convinced then Sri Ramakrishna steps in and he says there's a little back and forth then he says listen there are three kinds of devotees match with this three kinds of devotees and he actually and he puts them three categories the lower the medium are the high and higher exactly like this he says but he's saying this thing and he explained but remember he's explaining the same thing in the language of bhakti what's the difference between the three he explains there so Ramakrishna says the first one the the the lower he says that God is something outside that's the English translation God is outside but if you look at the Bengali that's much more direct he says the first one says Oh a vago on it says that is God it's much more intimate direct way of saying that's God there is God in the temple of the church there's God in heaven and that's the first one I am here that is God get different and here that is God Here I am that's God and this is the world the second one says that God is in the hearts of everybody the doctor himself he felt like that God is in the hearts of everybody deep within there is God and the superior one Sri Ramakrishna sees the superior one says God indeed is everybody and then he goes on further to say God and His creation are not different there is only one notice three stages connected with the with the pot and clay example the first stage was when the clay was introduced what did the person think oh this is a pot there is a cause clay this is the world there's a cause god that is God first type the second type says second stage in that example where do you find that clay within the pot where the second second type of day which is the medium the the middling one finds God in the hearts of all beings and the third one which says God and its creation or one there is no such thing separate thing called pot it is one reality the clay alone is one reality Brahman alone is there beyond cause and effect it's not that there is a cause called God who has created an effect called the world rather there is oneness let me put it in other language the first type of approach is what is called carrier - T carrier - T means effect view effect view is just like I am a I am one entity you are an entity these chairs and tables are entities there is some superior entity called God that's the first stage the second stage is no no it's not a superior separates the God is not a thing among many things there's one thing called God a very nice thing but it's a thing called God no no not like that the second stage is God is the reality within each of us and the consciousness in my heart we do Vedanta not the body not the mind there is a witness consciousness or the devotee will say Ishta devatha chosen form of God in my heart I meditate I'm not saying there that God is the body mind is the chair in the table no no I'm just saying God is the the Ishta devatha in my heart and beyond this is the superior devotee who realizes that God alone is this entire universe there is no difference between outside inside what I see with eyes open I see with eyes closed sri ramakrishna puts it this way what God exists when I closed my eyes and it exist when I open my eyes what kind of Court would that be so oneness one is seeing God as an effect as a thing the other wonders higher one is to see God if the cause of everything and the highest one is to see God beyond cause-and-effect non-dual and he put it in the language of devotion I'm putting it in the language of non-duality in philosophy yes true true that's a good way of putting it the overwhelming worldview of dualism is there is the world there is the individual and there is God let's do a list approach to religion most religions are like this and that's because most people are like this that's what most people are comfortable with then you go a little higher that God you're speaking about where is that God it's also present imminent in our own hearts and then finally us and the world we are not separate from God there is only one reality it's not that God produced a separate thing called man and God and world there's only non duality so dualism qualified monism non-dualism this is what goroh pada is saying here there are three kinds of I'll come to you there are three kinds of seekers inferior middling and superior Drishti are depending upon their worldview the way they see things who pass on our polished am taught thumb anu compile the spiritual practices mantra japa worship meditation they are all inculcated yet taught a new camp ayah says the Upanishads teach this Vedanta teaches this out of grace out of sympathy let them also come up and let what will they catch hold off shri ramakrishna puts it this way you can ascend to the roof of the house you can go up by a staircase in those days there was no elevator and then you can go up by the staircase you can go up by a ladder you can go up by a rope ladder or by a rope but in any in in many in any of these ways you can ascend to the top of the house now so different methods they are they are they are taught depending on the nature of the seeker now even in the first at the at the very beginning you will notice there different kinds one is I believe in God the first stage of course has to be a belief stage of faith for the seeker the first stage the inferior one is that I believe in God but in this form my krishna my christ my rama my kali and that is god and what about others not interested or outright rejection this is the form this is this is God and this is the worship of God this is how God should be worshipped this is true religion this is so this starts up like that and this person can easily catch up God in catch hold of God or worship believe in in this format then you go further but no all the forms of God are the same God same reality is in all forms whether Vishnu or Kali or father in heaven or Jesus or the avatar is our arm or Krishna they're all the same reality I may have one form into which to worship and you may have another the chosen ideal Ishta devatha and that's fine that's a higher way of looking at it and then it is even higher way of looking at it that this God dwells in everybody it's not just a God in many forms but the same God is in all beings this was the stage at which this is what the doctor really believed in but even that you might say if God is in all beings isn't that advaitha no no no advaitha would be there is not garden all beings and universe only one reality God and His creation or one and that reality I am you must have the courage to say that the boldness to say that I am that reality which appears as God individual and universe so that is up to a turn on duality yes Hanuman was asked by Rama what do you think of me and he gave the beautiful example that three stages duality qualified monism and non duality i am the servant from the point of view of the body thou art the master I am the sentient sentient being I am your part and you are the whole and as the Atman as pure consciousness now and I are to 180 main st tammany this is my conviction not one of them all of them as your perspective changes but of course a hardcore hardcore non do list you know what they will say and say that the first two are of course delusion because I am NOT body so you if you see as body means you're in delusion as the subtle body sentient being that's also delusion I am Atman that's the truth so as admin as pure being I am God or one that is the conclusion so that would be a very hardcore non do list the totapuri kind who would say that okay and should be the open it sure does it out of compassion all the varieties of teachings and shri ramakrishna tells dr. Sarkar all these are therefore he points out all devotees are not alike points out the dr. Sarkar also don't think you are the most superior and there's something but far beyond the works dr. Sircar is the middling kind yes yes you should but remember shootie here we mean by convention the hindu scriptures the vedas and there they make the original scriptures the shooties which would directly revealed to the Rishi's you might call it revealing knowledge and the derivative ones like gita and all the others Manduca carica for example Mundaka Upanishad is Shruti but the karika which is doing the same thing in fact doing it much more clearly pointing out your reality but it's not considered shooty because it's derivative it's based on the Upanishads so that's what we've a currently did he said what is the Veda is it only the four books of the Hindus he said no it's spiritual knowledge and this is eternal knowledge it is embodied in those four books which also embodied in the different scriptures of the world the whole Vedas are the spiritual knowledge not at all lots of things are that there's poetry there there is a worship of the baby God's there there's mythology there that's not important there are obscure religious rituals there which have outdated 5,000 years ago they were old so the doser those are not important it's the essential teachings of the open issues which are important and that's Vivekananda says where the literally means knowledge and he says it is found in all the great religious tradition is as it ended is God's book finished he says no all the teachings in the past in all the religions and civilizations we accept with respect all that are there in the present we accept and to all those that will come in the in the future I await with open arms absolutely so it's not just Vivekananda being very liberal today soory Schwar acharya found a beautiful verse suresh for acharya the most erudite among Shankar Acharya disciples who wrote Nash karna said do not in one of his what Tikas he says by whatsoever method the seeker is led to an intuitive grasp of the truth that is to be taken as a genuine teaching forgotten she says it says III buy whatever whatever method whichever whichever method you are led to enlightenment all that should be taken as accepted as should be acceptable as genuine teaching so yes by any method whatsoever yeah but the hardcore Vedanti now that now it starts the next verse onwards I will not mention it now I will take it up next time what did we just do verse number 16 so ash Rama's three Veda means three kinds of seekers inferior middling and superior this we understand what are they we get a idea from Sri Ramakrishna I just tell you what Shankar Acharya said he didn't explain what the difference is he just says Drishti darshan Assam at him the capacity of insight based on that threefold but what are the three categories he doesn't mention he just says I'll read out the Sanskrit and translate who pass on oppa dished I am the ductile Magnum Adama Drishti ah ash Rama Rama burtom Carmenita he says these have been taught these techniques have been taught or important point he makes these techniques have been taught for the inferior in the middling a spirit then what about the superior aspirant Wednesday class yes man dukhia Garapan says come to me for the superior I'm going to give you the direct teaching the concentrated teachings so come come on Wednesdays so that is the superior aspirant so he says the middling and the inferior husband's for them all these have been taught Carmenita and the rituals - all the rituals here he means the Vedic rituals but we can take it as all the kinds of rituals we do in temple and church and all not you're at miracle at Makaha duty or ET nishita hooter modesty Artem not for those who have got clarity about the oneness of atman and brahman I am Brahman this clarity I'm not seeing enlightenment he says this clarity conviction penetration is coming it's not really meant for them but be careful don't give it up you're in inviting disaster daya loon evaded by the most kind and sympathetic and loving Veda Veda is very loving Anu Campea SanMar Gaga Santa ha by grace it is giving to those spiritual seekers and Marga that means who are following the paths of righteousness those who want to realize God Khatami mama mama mom a guitarist improv no Yahoo so the saying is quoting the attitude of the Vedas Qasim how imam did these people hissing how these little the vedas are feeling sorry for the inferior and middling how will they come to the Wednesday class basically so I'm training them up to come at my authority that they will come to the realization of the oneness of Atman this vision of oneness how will they attain to it there are actually many people who don't like it I am religious but I like chanting these things doing this pooja going to the temple and bowing down before my chosen I I'm happy there this is just disturbing me so to be careful here you must convert must continue with one's practice never ever give up the practice because it can actually lead to psychological disturbance there is a support a spiritual support which we have built up by our practices and Gora paga says it's very good and the waiter supports it but go forward if you don't go forward what will happen is he will say later on and what is that great vision the waiters are pushing at towards is given a few coats Shankar Acharya gives coats kano Phoenicia young man asana manu te na Haruma no madam today vibrato with DNA the merely damn opposite a can opener shot what cannot be thought of by the mind if it cannot be thought of by the mind can you pray to it if you're praying you're thinking we can't be thought of you can't pray to it can you meditate upon it no it's not an object of the mind that which is not an object of the mind that which the mind cannot think about cannot imagine cannot conceive by which the mind imagines conceives things understands remembers and forgets what is that that subjective consciousness the pure consciousness today ever Bromham with thee no that alone to be the ultimate reality Brahman no Adama Adama porosity not that which you worship as very beautiful not that which you worship as this this Brahman this my lord a thing a superior thing no doubt see it is my understanding that the great prophets of the Abrahamic traditions the of the Judaic tradition when they strongly brought against idol worship the commandments this is what they had in mind I have not come across this kind of an interpretation but I'm in data's there actually but that it's not a thing out there so you shouldn't worship a thing as God but of course that's not how it is understood in the Abrahamic traditions will the most of the teachings there God in heaven God as father or Allah it's it's that first group that there is a God so it's good that begins with that but by this definition it's also at that and Idol something different from you so not know I am you did them opacity and then they made the further mistake of thinking that the images worshipped by the Hindus we're like the idol worship you know they worshiping but no Hindu worships a stone or or they are not worshipping plastic or paper or stone or no in Durga Puja you see the greatest the our terminal worship of the Divine Mother in Bengal after the five-day worship what is done to the image it's tossed into the river with with great great joy and fanfare and so if that is garden why would you toss it into the river nobody not even the child thinks it's God it's it's it's called an al Haram Avila Manas support on which you can fix and worship and adore but the support is not God it's a material thing so this is the meaning of K nope initially but the greatness of the Veda is it understands some people need a support so you may need a farmer named a month or technique of meditation a way of conceiving something and so many things are given somebody said to me practice practice practice inner of Kundalini Yoga no it's in the spine right around so many fingers from here in the heart chakra from an idiotic goal of others point of view what would go to policy really after all this the spine you are all laughing because you invented a class but don't do it outside people will get upset angry will say you're a bunch of atheists remember this very open assured the Vedas fully approve of those methods I need a place to my mind is fixed in the body give me a place in the body to concentrate I can do that don't ask me to concentrate on pure consciousness how can I do that I have no idea at all what you're talking about but if you say six straight ah is it close your eyes ah if you say breathe in five counts and release ten counts okay and hold for fifteen counts okay and don't do five ten that's not that that's not the ratio it's for sixteen eight but okay I know what you what you're telling me now visualize a lotus at the heart chakra and make it radiant and put the deity okay I understand what you're talking about so it is very useful and the person after some time it the clarity comes for everybody clarity comes I'll come to you what else dr. Ouma see the chandogya upanishad I'm quoting from Shankar Acharya what is the thing to be attained that thou art another quotation art may they them serve them again from chandogya upanishad the Atman alone is everything so this is the level to which one must finally rise the next few verses which will be due will do next time remember there's a gap day after tomorrow I'm off to the Bahamas not on a cruise but there are lectures there I'll be back on the 25th so the next vedanta class the wednesday class will be on the 27th 27 so that we are missing one class in between what will happen in the next few verses is go Rapada remember I am a follower of sri ramakrishna we are all inclusive we are very nice what about all these is not so nice he will now go on a rant against dualistic approaches so he is very much an elitist so he's going to say what is the problem with dualism next few verses see there are some great things in the car Iike Lord Apotheker Iike a philosopher said God about the talks about Advaita agita avi Road especial non duality non origination non touch non contradiction non contradiction non-touch Esparza I might add one more thing that non mind of our money Bhavana no mind no duality no origination no no contradiction no touch Princip ensued the world of appearance has no effect at all on you the reality and no mind so these are some of the great themes of gora pada and this no contradiction of eros is going to come up next to establish that he will show the problem with the dualistic approaches multiple problems and they're really there one is the entire thing depends on faith which is a terrible problem in today's world when faced with the attacks of Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris I haven't seen a single rabbi or priest or theologian nor the debates you see none of them come off well you can't why can't you because all the religion these people are talking about are in the flat first level and that is entirely faith-based in fact the teachings of the bhakti sutras they will tell you don't talk to people who criticize religion why there's a reason because the kind of religion you are practicing is faith which will be disturbed the whole point is to make progress not to fight with others so first of all there it's entirely faith-based second God a power will point out they all differ from each other there is no underlying unity so there is fanaticism mine is right yours is wrong obviously because the forms of Vishnu is right and the Shiva is wrong or one will say Christianity is right and Islam is wrong or something like that because this clearly difference is there if you allow difference then what will happen he says raga Drescher I will choose one and dislike the other I will choose one and dislike the other there is preference there is preference there is choice and preference and choice will lead to unhappiness to fanaticism and that leads to fights per aspera million they will say they fight among each other but if you take the a point of view of the non dualist from that point of view all of these are good practices they are all appearances if the entire world is an appearance of me the Brahmin what objection can I have to Krishna or Christ that's the best appearance possible the finest appearance is the most sattvic appearance is Garbett form with the avatar excellent all full of sweetness at one place sri ramakrishna tells bhava not he says there are these two paths the path of knowledge and the path of devotion in the path of knowledge that one reality appears full of radiance in the path of devotion that one thing he says it appears full of sweetness so it is they did different things which we are experiencing in different ways there can be no contradiction how can you have fanaticism if you're a non dualist first of all they are all one with you how can you fight with yourself the T is the atheist they were Christian the Muslim the Hindu the Buddhist they're all one with you so he goes on it so this this approach is rational it is based on experience it gives a foundation to harmony there is no contradiction with it against anything else so so many things he will go on and not in an always nice way oh elephant here's an elephant story coming up next he says the duelists have contradictions with each other but we they have no content you know I am Nibiru deity this teaching has no contradiction it is avi Rosa with the dualistic teachings why not when he says imagine you are riding your elephant the elephant of non-dualism it's a non-dualistic elephant through the village road and there's this crazy guy standing on the roadside he says come let's have an elephant fight well raise your elephant against mine let's fight our elephants together - an elephant fight obviously there can be no elephant fight because he's crazy he has no elephant and sure the dualist will be delighted with this guy this is the harmony he's talking about because you don't have a leg to stand upon what will you so one illusion can clash with another illusion no illusion clashes with the with the truth so his approach is the same rope is mistaken by somebody as a snake somebody as a garland somebody as what a computer cable maybe that's not a classical example but anyway now the snake and the garland and the computer cable are mutually contradictory it can't be all of them it can't be all of them they are all exclusive it has to be one or the other but if you realize it's a rope first of all you know the truth now second you also know all of them are talking about the same thing they just don't know it and you can honestly say you are all seeing the truth in your own way so he will go on I know into this as a critique I was thinking today and end with this this is fine and so I'm the very kinda heap he goes on he in fact says on non-duality we can have harmony and he puts non-duality as the final thing in his teachings Swami Vivekananda does the only problem with this is if you require this superior kind of seeker to understand this then you're mean you mean that those who are dualistic or on the middle stages they won't understand this so how will they be non fanatical they'll continue to be fanatical oh they'll continue to have those problems with faith and reason there I think it's Sri Ramakrishna's greatness where he comes in and says even at the dualistic path even in whatever your approach to God there is no need to be fanatical you can actually love God in your own particular way while respecting the approaches of all others or in Marge's book infinite paths to infinite reality because that reality is infinite it can be approached in different paths he Swami buzz and hunch is pointed this out he says this gradation superior inferior those Ramakrishna mentions it it's vacant and who took it up strongly it is actually a Advaitic approach but you see in general sri ramakrishna does not say it is higher or lower he doesn't make a difference if you remember yesterday's a pretty strange example he gave a simple example he says look at this room depending on where you are standing you will see it differently there is standing at the edge or in the middle of the room you see it differently a perspectival approach there he doesn't say the one who's standing in the middle is superior to the one who's standing at the of the room No so Sri Ramakrishna's approaches some what is flat is not hierarchical this is a little hierarchical it's a bit elitist that way alright we'll end with that question yes yes you can graduated means you have to be careful and watch what you are doing whether we need those practices or not remember all those practices can be fully justified from a non-dualistic point of view Sudama Krishna continued to visit the Kali temple till then the end of his days shunk Shankar Acharya after his fullest realization also helped also established all dualistic practices and temples and he wrote beautiful hymns one is it is helpful for others it sets a good example for others and second is it's not false from your point of view why I'll tell you established in the non-dualistic point of view one can eat and talk and hold a job and read Vedanta all these are dualistic things but you know it's all Bremen the vedanta cahuita words brahma heart penumbra Mohave if you can walk and talk and hold a job and eat and drink why can't you worship and do puja and meditate of course you can but you need not it's a thing from an unrealistic perspective the the person who is developing do they need it yes the one who has reached this so-called third level do they need it no it might not it might simply be like Raman mansion but you might do all this also without the slightest hesitation not once enlightenment comes if it's just an intellectual clarity of course one can slip back one hasn't progressed very far anyway but if there is a breakthrough spiritual breakthrough then generally one does not slip back there is no question of a real insight where will from what will you slip back into what a simple story which I read there was this monk who was visiting a village and there was a rich man of the village a landlord would come to him daily good monk would sit under a tree come to him daily with his questions and the monk wouldn't reply a few days later that gentleman came and invited the monk to food at his house come and the monk was in a very good mood the teacher was in a very good mood he said alright I'll go and have food at your place today so he goes and this rich man is very happy that prepared very good food and a monk comes with his begging bowl and the rich man sees the begging bowl is completely full of mud so dirty the monk says put it here you're the food and the rich man said such nice food to do spoilt and you'll get sick if you try to eat that the monks is oh yes what should we do well we should empty the bowl and the tossed out the monk tossed out the mud now put it in there the rich man said no it's still dirty the monk said in what should we do well wash it it washed it nicely and then now we put it no it still little to smell there you know what should we do scrub it properly so it scrubbed nicely and shiny and then what should we do now you can put the food there and they put the food there a monk ate it and then the when a monk was going over the rich man said circuit could you please answer my question and the monk said what a fool you are I've answered your questions the question he said give me some teaching says what do you fool your answered your question I've given you the teaching what is the teaching first our head is full of mud we saw in the clay so first empty it chitta should be purification of the mind then comes that it's still smeared it's still not enough it has to be washed the mind has to be sharpened that is cheetah acog rata meditation first karma yoga then oppa sana meditation and then then that ignorance is there I still don't know I have a pure and concentrated mind but I don't know the reality then these teachings will be helpful and then enlightened you've had a nice meal time useful so three levels of spiritual practice which is why they the point was to eat the meal but unless the conditions are right you'll just make a terrible mess so the conditions are given by the spiritual practices but again this is a very our non-dualistic way of looking at and others would say looking down at other spiritual practices just preliminary practices and the real thing is the Wednesday class all right home shanti shanti shanti hurry he own that sri ramakrishna Aparna Musto