Video 54

55. Mandukya Upanishad | Chapter 4 Karika 2

I'll start with the chant Oh Bertram Carini fish in Aoyama diva but drama she moksha period Etra sterile Angus - SHhhh - bogum Shasta newbie Hashima Davis was Tina in drove read - raava was Tina pooja Vishwa vida Swiss Tina stark show Irish Tony me swass Tino pre-hospital righto own Shante Shante Shante so we are studying the Mundaka Upanishad with the mandu Erica let me just all right and it has four chapters as we know the first chapter was based on the Upanishad where the teachings about vitória were given then the second chapter was a logical demonstration of the falsity of the world the third chapter was a logical demonstration of non-duality that the Turia our real self is non-dual there is no second reality apart from the Turia and the fourth chapter which we are starting now is primarily concerned with various objections raised by different schools of Indian philosophy those which were contemporary with God about at that time about 1,400 1,500 years ago 1400 years ago so he has started this chapter the fourth chapter called a lot Ashanti prac arena with the first two verses are actually salutations oh let me just mention what is housekeeping separate so Shashank is our co-host and he will let people in Oh some are worried about joining late they have been desperately texting me please let me in when I come but don't worry the co-host is there he or she will keep an eye out for people coming in and he will keep admitting them so you don't have to worry the second thing is about questions and comments so as I go through the verses and explanations you can ask questions as they come to your mind just raise your hand and the way you do it is go to the bottom of your screen there's something called participants if you click that you will get an option for raising the hand and if you click that raised hand option next to your picture we will all see a little blue hand so the when I ask for questions the co-host will unmute you and call out your name so that you can ask the question and we can have a little back and forth also I can talk to you you can respond so that's how we will do it we had started the fourth chapter in the fourth chapter the first two verses are salutations namaskara salutation - first one is salutation to God while validation to God for the successful completion of our study for being blessed with enlightenment also because God is regarded as the first guru the for the ADI guru the source of the spiritual tradition here Narayana is being saluted let me read the verse yawning Akasha Kalpana therm on yoga go no come on Ganga be Ninasam but someone Daedra padam padam I salute the one who is fully enlightened some Buddha the one who is the best or the the greatest among two-legged biped among those with human form so it's Purushottam narayan who is supposed to have a human form who is who realizes his own identity with all of us Herman Gargano poem on all of us he realizes his own identity he is pure consciousness and he realizes that all of us all the jiva's all the sentient beings we are all pure consciousness and he realizes this true pure consciousness so consciousness realizes it's identical justness which is God realizes its identity with all of us who are consciousness true consciousness and this consciousness is compared to gagana sky actually the G was we are compared to skies we who are like the sky unlimited sky who seemed to be limited it's actually a reference back to the sky and pot example so the unlimited sky just like that your unlimited consciousness and what we worship as God is also the same consciousness who is fully aware we are not aware we are unenlightened but God is always eternally enlightened and aware of God's non difference with us that we are all one with God it's one unbroken ocean of consciousness this verse has given rise to controversy because of the use of the word Sam Buddha I mentioned it last time so because Buddhism was very strong at that time and go too far this time so some scholars have said this is a Buddhist text look he is saluting the Buddha the word Sam Buddha somebody literally means fully awakened but it's also applied to the Buddha and we padam varam the the finest or the greatest of the most excellent among those with two legs it's it's a way of addressing the Buddha when you are saying it is worship of God you're just being clever but actually it is a reference to the Buddha but Narayana you see if you take that interpretation we will not go into it it is an endless controversy maybe we take that interpretation then the rest of the text does not make sense why if it is a Buddhist text and why would the Buddhist be interested in Upanishads why would the Buddhist bit interested in an eternal unchanging awareness which is our real nature which is something most of all this philosophies would not agree with so and saluting Narayana does make sense because you know actually when this is traditionally studied in Uttarakhand in Himalayas when we would study the Upanishads or the Gita in Vedanta classes it would start with a series of chance and I don't do that here but let me just read out what the chants are so if you are in a group of monks studying Vedanta in the Himalayas with the teacher you've said they're in the class starts with this chant Oh Narayana but mahabhava system shutting shotput tripura Shoreham ja the awesome sukham gold up Adam Muharram Govinda yoga in drama Tosca system Shri Shankar Acharya Matassa Padma bottom jaw a star Malcolm Chisholm dumb tota combo tikka Karim and Jana smart guru Santa come on at OS me let me do the whole chant shooties pretty pure nom om Karuna liam namami bhagavad padam shankaram loca shankaram shankaram Shankar Acharya --m Keysha Bambara unum Sutra Basha Krita one day Raghavan to Pune Pune Ishwara guru taught me T mu ta da v ba Guinea the OMA but dr. D hiya Dakshina mutari nama so this is the chant with which all the Vedanta classes begin why am I saying this look at how it starts the first one at the the very first thing which is mentioned in this chant is Narayana m-- we begin our study by saluting Narayana Lord Narayana Vishnu who is the source of this Advaita tradition so it's a salutation to the Guru parampara the teachers who taught their students and who in turn taught their students and the teaching has come down to us so Narayana God is the first guru and whom did Narayana teach it to Padma bhavam the Brahma who you know the beautiful imagery Brahma is born of the navel of Vishnu and then Brahma teaches it to the sage Vasishta brushes to teaches it to his son Shakti and then Shakti teaches it to his son parashara they're all sages Rishi's and teaches it to Vyasa and biasa teaches it to his son suka suka Deva so up to this is Rishi parampara they are a different class of spiritual masters then next is a transition to human ordinary spiritual seekers like us who is the first one this is slight break here from sugar to it good jump straight to go to pada the author of this text Manduca carroca golda pada the great Kota pada and then from go Rapada to his disciple govinda pada and from his from govinda pada to his disciple Shankar Acharya so all of them we salute and then the next is a salutation of Shankar Acharya and his disciple Sri Shankar Acharya and his disciples but mafada REO has Tamil as Tamil Acharya tota car charger and it says what tika car the one who wrote the particles which are commentaries on Shankar's commentaries it means suresh for Acharya so what tika car is Suresh for Acharya in the tradition advaita tradition Shankar Acharya is known as Basha car and Suresh watch areas known as war tikka carwash acara the one who composed the commentaries on what on the Upanishads brahma sutra bhagavad-gita particle katabatic has another kind of commentary it's a sub commentary commentary on a commentary so Suresh or acharya composed those come into sub commentaries on Shankar Acharya commentaries and then it's a salutation to Shankar Acharya who is a master of Shruti and Smitty and the Puranas I salute Shankar Acharya I salute brother ayaan of Vyasa Vyasa wrote the brahma sutras and Shankar Acharya rota vasya Sutra Hasek Rito one day the one who wrote the sutras is Vyasa the one who wrote the commentary on the sutras is Shankara I salute both of these lords again and again Pune Pune and then finally the last one is Ishwara guru at matey 3 God guru and I myself the individual being all three multivator Viva ha Guinea there are three forms of one ultimate reality that ultimate reality is called Dakshinamoorthy Shiva or Brahman we called Brahman saguna brahman saguna brahman is God Ishwara but also appears as my guru and also I myself is a very beautiful thing one reality appearing as God guru and disciple I salute what is this Dakshina Moorthy like vo Mahad be up today high all pervading like the sky so its consciousness be brings us back to our space example arkasha example so the first verse says that space like consciousness which are individual beings which is also God God realizes its oneness with them all this was to point out that it is not so strange to suddenly salute Narayana because traditionally all advaithic classes all teachings begin with the salutation of Narayana then the second verse is also a salutation salutation to the teaching to advaita itself the teaching of advaitha second verse as per your go by nama service at were SoCo heater ha avi Bardo v rude gesture the shittest mhmm mhmm I salute namami 'him I salute they she that this teaching that which has been taught what has been taught especially oka the yoga which is non-contact remember when we summarized the third chapter we said these are certain terms to remember but non origination non duality non contact and no mind it's a non contact a special yoga service except was sook Rohit aha service at Osaka which is the happiness for all beings heat aha which is the welfare of all beings au revoir though it is beyond on any argument beyond our it is is not an argument with with anybody and therefore other route non contradicted by anything this teaching is not contradicted by anything or does not contradict anything they should is teaching deshita which has been taught I salute so this is the meaning of the second verse it's interesting to see the words which have been used I will go through them little by little first one most important which we have seen in third chapter also especially ah as Persia non-touch this is a special word non touch or non contact this is the word favored by God our Father but a more common word used in Vedanta is a Sangha which does not which is detached it does not come into contact with anything Brahman Atman Turia our real nature really who we are has come is completely a Sangha it has no contact it does not stick so you're made of Teflon nonstick so nothing sticks to you all this that appears people and evens and happiness and misery bodies and lives they come and go you are completely unaffected why what is the reason is it why is it called a swash or a Sangha what gives it this nature the self what makes it non sticky one way of putting this is simple way would be it's non dual it is second less so what would it stick with there is no second reality apart from it to be attached to something to be stuck with something to have a relationship with something there must be at least two if your non-dual admin of the Turia is non dual how is the Toria non dual what is the Turia consciousness which appears as waking dreaming deep sleep but in reality it is pure consciousness now how is it non dual did you not just say to do means the fourth if it's number four how can it be without - only after you go to two and three and then you come to four remember the first three the four the first three are appearances it is not that that there is a ring and a bracelet and a necklace and gold gold is not a fourth reality apart from the three ornaments it is the reality of three ornaments now so gold is non-dual with respect to the ornaments though they appear to be three different types of ornaments when you look at it from the gold perspective they are not apart from it they're not a second thing apart from the gold itself difference is in name and form and use nama Rupa yoga Hana another way so - dia is non sticky because it's non dual there is no second thing apart from it for with it it can stick it can have a relationship a spud sha means no contact no attachment it means no no contact no attachment and it means no relationship there is no someone there no connection or relationship then another way of looking at this no relationship is Turia or the Atman is para martica the ultimate or absolute truth whereas waking dreaming deep sleep everything else the world and all its evinced whatever is happening is Viva Haruka transactional the lower level may be the relative truth the appearance has no relationship with the reality the first approach was because it's non dual there is no second thing for it to be attached to there is no second thing for it to have a relationship with now I am saying that because to dia is para martica absolute reality and all this multiplicity of the universe all living beings all the objects all experiences time space causation they are all at the lower level of reality via waha Rika and the lower level cannot affect the higher level the the appearance cannot affect the reality just as all the water in the desert in the Oasis or in a mirage all the water of the Mirage cannot is not sufficient to wet even one grain of sand in the in the desert the snake which appears by mistake on the Rope can cannot affect the Rope at all all that happens in the dream once we wake up from it we see it has not affected our us at all there's no change in our waking life compared to the because of the dream just as the dream cannot affect your waking similarly the waking cannot affect Turia because they are not at the same level of truth if the same level of reality then only it can affect the same level of reality is not their highest level param Arctica Torreya next lower level varaha Rica this world waking the next lower level prati Waseca appearance snake in the Rope water in the desert or dreams constructs of the mind that is not even as real as the waking and the waking is not as fear is not as real as the Turia lower level of reality cannot affect the higher level or surface level of reality cannot affect the deeper level no connection no effect then the next word used is service to a suka suka ha it is happiness for all for all beings for all sentient sucked to eyes a word which is sometimes peculiarly used for the mind so send it basically means sentient being we all had those living beings we have minds so for all of us it is direct happiness the studio this teaching is teaching gives happiness directly Shankar Acharya says some do not give happiness directly for example he gives yatha top AHA that with tapa means tapasya hard spiritual practices austerities a very austere simple life years of meditation now that produces happiness but in itself it is difficult and tough it go through a lot of struggle to reach that level of peace and happiness but he says this teaching directly gives happiness to service obstruct where any who approaches it all sentient beings directly you become happy when you when you assimilate this teaching in Hindi they say gam asana step beyond our son is a putana he this teaching is not easily digested it requires digestion after this teaching is digested or assimilated then only it gives happiness undigested food all known only no matter how tasty it always gives stomach trouble only so the problem with advaitha is it can give unhappiness but it's when it is assimilated it directly gives happiness to all beings and then he says heat aha Salwa heater so it's it is welfare for all beings it is always it's a kind of happiness which is always conducive to welfare and Shankar Raja Aryan is coming to thee remember this is guru father's car Iike and there is a commentary by Shankar Acharya so the trunk racer is commentry he says that all kinds of happiness always are not conducive to welfare he says sense enjoyments for example they may be pleasurable and they may give you a burst of happiness but always it ends in unhappiness so there are lot of pleasures which we chase in life but we generally end in frustration unhappiness and lack of fulfillment but this one it is highest welfare he Taha'a survey hit aha for everybody it is the highest welfare then an important word avi vada vada means discussion debate Aviva the beyond debate beyond controversy so Advaita here is an interesting thing to see this whole chapter is about controversy is about debate now go to father's approach to this is interesting when we study at weight of a tanta we see there's a lot of debate going on lot of reasoning lot of questions counter questions arguments counter arguments so guru fathers approaches interesting his approaches that we have no quarrel with any philosophy rather these philosophies the dualistic philosophies contradict each other and therefore because they contradict each other each position is criticized by the other one duelist school criticizes the other duelist school and that one criticizes the first one so God up at this point is he's very skillful that way they refute each other I don't have to work hard you cut each other down and I am left as the winner so in that sense I have no controversy with anybody you contradict each other and therefore see there are different ways of dealing with an opponent one is you show the fault in the other person's argument and then you present strong reasons to support your your position like a lawyer would argue in court deconstruct the argument the position of the opposing lawyer and support your own position that kind of debate is called japa japa means it's a type of debate we're so purchased happen them you try to establish your position and para box-shadow shanem and you cut down it's an offensive that you cut down your opponent's position you defend your position and with arguments and use criticize your opponent's position that's normally the way debate is done and Shankaracharya does that quite often there is a another kind of debate which is called Wakanda where you you do not actually advance any independent argument to support your position you just show that the opponent is wrong you use the opponent's own position and to show that it's self contradictory the opponent's position implodes it does it's unsustainable so whatever the opponent's say all of them when you show that all of their positions are illogical without trying to prove your own position without saying anything at all you remain as the victor so that's called Witten de so in the martial arts there is one kind of martial art called Aikido where there is no direct offense they use the force of the attacker to over - to you know throw down the attacker or to defeat the attacker so the you force of the attacker is used against the attacker now it is some kind of philosophically Aikido yeah somebody said philosophy you know or do you use the force of the opponent against the opponent that is Vuitton de nagarjuna the great Buddhist shoonya body the famous white hunting one who used this technique he said chanita service Hristina which t means philosophy all philosophies are empty and here the technique to show each philosophy when you say he will analyze it and show that you are wrong now what is his philosophy he will not say and his opponents getting exasperated with him would say that at least this much you have said that server Juniata server - Tina all philosophies are empty so that's your you have said that so that then your philosophy is also empty whatever you're closer fate is included in that no not you know replies to that saying that if I had said something you could have said that about me that my philosophy is empty but I am NOT saying anything you are the one who's speaking and I'm showing you the defects in your position and I say nothing so that's we Thunder that's one kind of approach among at Drayton's the famous the one who used this technique was three harsha there's a book called kundan a cornucopia which one of the most difficult of ethic texts gora pada uses a version of that he does not deconstruct the opponent's position no he goes one step further he allows them to deconstruct each other and then he says I have one I didn't have to do anything I didn't even have to show you that inconsistencies or illogical it is in your position others have done that and you have done that for others so all of you are defeated so that's basically his approach that's why he says are the avada this teaching does not enter into controversy with any any others with any of the other schools who will all come now one one by one they're all dualistic schools are the root because there is no controversy with anybody are the root that means there is no contradiction this teaching has no contradiction it is an uncontradicted victor now just one point before we go ahead this is one way of establishing harmony we do not directly oppose what you are saying your position for example I have given I think I mentioned it earlier it was many years ago not so many years ago but maybe 40 years ago there was well-known one of the many debates between the duelists and non-dual it's it was in Bangalore one great non duelists Rami Kashi Khan and the Giri he was in Mumbai he was presented with a challenge from a well-known duelist school of Vedanta from Madras School of Atlanta and all the non duelists they implored him because he was one of the leading scholars of non-dualism Advaita please go and represent advaitha so advaitha the way to fight will be there and you represent advaitha he did that and the debate was held over two days a threatt supposed to be held with three days over three days what happened was the first session of the debate went well both sides representing each other's arguments and so on and so forth but the audience became very heated both sides they were sitting duelists and non-dualistic they starting throwing abusing each other throwing chairs at each other and finally it collapsed in chaos so nothing was nothing came out of it but this Swami why how I heard about it this Swami later wrote a book or Dwight away giant Amala the necklace or garland of victory of a traitor he took it that I have won and he said I wrote numerous letters to the organisers saying give a decision who won I got no response so I am taking it that I have gone anyway the point of telling you that all this story is this in that book he makes an interesting point that why are the duelists against non-dualism everything that you say the duel is to say we accept you talk about God of course we accept God worshiping God yes rituals yes all non-dualism which words do you go to Temple yes we go to Temple what about Ganga bath yes can grab us is good all of that we accept accept that we say all of it is waiver horican Mattia it's an appearance immediately that drives the duelists wild this is exactly what we don't like what do you mean false what we mean by false it is at the level of the Bihari consortium transactional truth param arctica Satyam is brahman then non-dual the ability the new guna Brahman the quality less unqualified Brahman now why would you be worried or do a list why would you be worried about that because in your philosophy this difference between Parramatta can be Baraka transactional truth and ultimate truth is not there for you there's only one truth and that truth we accept so I mean it's still not a satisfactory answer but it's a very interesting way of putting it see at that level at the vehicle level we have no contradiction with any of the dualist schools if you want to worship Vishnu we already want to worship Divine Mother Shakti we already want to worship Shiva we already why only that outside the fold of Vedic Hinduism whether you want Christianity or Judaism or Islam it's very easy to see all of these as worshipping of saguna brahman Ishwara in different forms you may call it father in heaven you may call it Jehovah you may call it Allah clearly by definition of those same religions it is saguna brahman the creator god of the universe and you worship and love yes and the transactional level we accept all of it so easily so this is available this is what go to father's saying this is one kind of way of establishing harmony of religions one kind but as you can see it's still not I mean as a non duelist you can do this and you can feel happy and superior we have accepted all of you and we have no contradiction with you but as a duelist you'll be right if you felt insulted by this kind of approach because clearly we are saying that all of it is at the level of appearance all of it is at the level of a dream or a level of a movie and the reality is what we non duelists have later on to be there when he talks about this noncontradictory Ness of advaitha gota bother no contradiction with others Shankar Acharya says combined means they're of course non-dualism Advaita is no contradiction with anybody else you see it's like the Nandu list is sitting on you're sitting on the elephant of non-dualism and walking down the narrow village path you imagine a Kerala scene and the elephant is walking down and you are on top of the elephant of non-dualism now there's a crazy guy standing in front of you on the little narrow village path and shouting mom trotty chala a fight let's have an elephant fight charge your elephant against my elephant you don't have an elephant Baba what elephant fight will there be see you he's crazy he doesn't even have an elephant because it's pure mejor iike a real elephant cannot fight against a dream elephant so there is no contradiction between you and me this is not going to please the dualist this hits it's not a nice thing to say actually so but this is the way Nandu lease can say there is no contradiction between us and any other philosophy one Sri Ramakrishna's approach and Swami Vivekananda's approach is based on this but it's not like this it's that that all the others are also equally effective ways of attaining salvation or moksha there are different ways they are devotional ways faith-based ways this is the direct reason based way but all of them will take you to salvation it's not that the others are false so I'm just wanted to make this point there is a way of noncontradictory Ness from a God of power this way and there is the Harmony of religions of Shri Ramakrishna which is a different kind which might be more acceptable to everybody else all right before I go on then let me take up yes yes it is implied you will see when when you talk about waking dreaming and deep sleep being at the appearance level and Toria being the ultimate truth what are you saying then you're automatically saying that there are two levels of reality you cannot deny even go to father will not deny that you see a waking world that you experienced a dream world and in a certain way you experience the the potential world of of deep sleep what are they then they are clearly not advaitha non-dual they are clearly subject to change and multiplicity causality what are they so lonely we are seeing their telling of dealing with them is to put them at a lower level of reality and that theories later developed by Shankar Acharya more specially by the post Shankara Drayton's yes you're right no it's not I am one with God will be like I am the wave of which God is the ocean the wave is a tiny part of the ocean you cannot claim that I am God I feel a oneness with God there is one kind of moksha in in luke t in dualism called saya being one with God but you cannot claim there thereby that I am God because the God nature that means all-powerful all-knowing omniscient can be only one being who is the creator of the universe sustainer of the universe they cannot be multiple and then it will not work and the Jeeva nature is also maintained that I am a sentient being who loves God surrenders to God and feels a oneness with God whereas in advaitha how is this oneness established you don't say literally that I am God I serve a pre Anand am God that's madness megalomania that's why dualist will be very angry with non-dualistic they think that you are suggesting that no what I mean is the oneness that I have with God serve apply Ananda and Ishwara is that at that level serve a pre and is not there a serve appear and it is that ground consciousness Turia Ishwara is not there as Ishwara as Judea we are wanting the same what's the use of saying it we uses this the server piano plays an appearance and the issue arose issue erect toys an appearance the Jiva nature is an appearance the Ishwara nature is an appearance in reality it is one consciousness correct correct yes so Hanuman Singh correct and that is an attitude acceptable to say us for example in the Ramakrishna orders Sri Ramakrishna like that Swami turian endowed so what was this it's important to quote it now hanuman asks Ramachandra Ramachandra asks hanuman what do you think of me Ramachandra who is avatar asks a new man what do you think of me and hanuman says lord day her body Hadassah hum when I consider myself to be this body Hanuman I am the servant thou art my master this is called the Sababa the attitude of the servant to the Lord and that's how we normally think of Hanuman then he says jiva-bhutah are talking shaka as a sentient being where what is called karma here or sattva here as a sentient being I am a part of you you are the whole of which I am a part Atma Buddha to treme varam ET mainstay tamati as Atman as pure consciousness you and I are want one you are also pure consciousness I am also pure are not too different pure consciousness is the only one it is no plurality in consciousness we are that one reality appearing as Rama appearing as Hanuman it remains cheetah mati this is my firm conviction which is my firm conviction from the perspective of the body this particular life and the servant thou art my lord from the perspective of the sentient being who is now Hanuman who has been in other births earlier which will go on later on and to other birds maybe the honey one became Amara in that way so he does not go on to further births but anyway from that perspective you are the total I am your part I'm like a wave in this ocean which you are I'm like a ray from the Sun which you are or Panasonic example as from a blazing bonfire thousands of sparks emanate you are the fire I am a spark from you so that's the second one as a sentient being as as this sukshma sharir a subtle body which goes from birth to birth and third has pure consciousness we are one all of these you see first one is greater duality second one is vashisht advaita part and whole third one is advaita which is which is true and once is a demon is cheetah mati I am convinced of of this so from these different perspectives all are true so this is the this is honey once approached and Sri Ramakrishna like this and Torian and is in one place but this its interest instructive what would a traditional hardcore God up another type of advaita in say to this and turian on digimon attacked actually had can you hear me everybody yes yes so suddenly my thing said that your connection is unstable but it seems to be okay 2d analogy actually met one swami who is very very staunch non duelist who is to come to meet orion energy in in Banaras when Tyrion ji was there in his old age and we are talking about non duality and that swami was saying that advaitha alone is true this data is not ultimately it's not true it's the appearance level only which exactly what god up either is trying to say it's that the appearance level we have no contradiction means it's it seems to be giving a lot of honor and prestige to you I have no contradiction with you but actually it's a little demeaning and insulting because you don't exist actually it's so how can I have any contradiction with you you are urban dream now 2d undg quoted the Hanuman from the body I am the servant body perspective servant from a Jeeva perspective part of you and from consciousness perspective Atma perspective we are one and this is the meaning of advaitha that Swami said ah but that's not the meaning you're misinterpreting notice she said her new man said as the from the board as a body I am their servant as the sukshma sharir Jeeva I am part of you but is a - but but as the Atman I and you are one what is the meaning of that word these two are false perspectives body perspective of course is false perspective sukshma sharir perspective is also false perspective the truth is I am to do so the truth is I nur one and that is the meaning of what about hanuman was trying to say then Tony Ananda G burst out laughing and he said T Gazeta one more Tony bozo you understand it in your own way yeah if someone is saying that my screen is freezing but now it should be alright earlier there was a warning that connection is unstable but now it seems to be alright but there are does not you'll notice that the avatar concept has not been introduced at all here it's it's not part of this paradigm at all now notice go up others at no point is dismissing ourselves or anybody else is inconsequential not at all the order pod is actually saying you are the ultimate reality add water does not dismiss your existence advaita gives you the highest existence advaitha just says you are deeply mistaken about who or what you think you are this personality this Ram mere personality is an appearance the reality about you is that you are Turia you are an infinite immortal consciousness this is what God APOD is pushing you towards now if you introduce a droid Avatara which got Avada has not introduced but if you do introduce our Tyra go to father will say what do you mean by the avatar if you mean the body of the avatar if you mean that particular personality of the avatar that's definitely an appearance but if you mean what the avatar is in reality our tourist area that's what was it yes yes yes certainly so the way our dwellings will deal with it you can yourself answer we have no contradiction with any of these philosophies now will you have devotion to Krishna if somebody asks a wife never comes in a cenar do I think what will you not wait in answer of course why not it an adroit thing will say it is of great help for me to attain my advaitha Yaya's Mukti to God is most helpful only thing is then what distinguishes the Mokpo from another way the only thing is ad waiting puts Mukti at a lower level Mukti will say is useful to attain gala where the doctor will say I am not using Mukti to attain gana bhakti for me is the ultimate I have love for God and God will take care of me that is the dualistic mindset that's what I'm go to father is criticizing here so you have to be ready for little a little harshness here because this is the highest other way the very radical non-dualism you see yes right they would value it would they consider it the ultimate truth No and we also should not anything that comes and goes is not the ultimate truth on it does the vision come and go yes anything that's an object I am experiencing this drishya that's also part of the appearance mithter jaggerth so is the vision something that you see yes so all of these you know the markers of unreality are there in even in spiritual experiences but then why should why are they valuable why would it not do it and consider them valuable because they're far better than the vision of the world which we are having now the vision of me right now also you're having a vision you're seeing this world this is also an appearance but this traps you in samsara whereas the vision of God it leads you away from samsara towards moksha adroit in will admit that but our waiting will say that's not the ultimate ultimately it is this realization that I am datoria and bhakti is helpful there that much even God upon them he never says it but he will admit Shankar Acharya at least will admit it is most helpful okay absolutely different levels of reality you admit it you say it's all strange different levels what does it mean but you had made different levels of reality you are you calling from India so it must be very early what's the time there now yes so it's very early in the morning just a little while ago you were sleeping and dreaming now all the things that happened in the dream all the if you happen to remember them how will you treat that oh that was a dream dream level of reality and waking level of reality we automatically make a distinction we immediately dismiss the dream upon waking up and we can compare the two we make a distinction between Mirage water and real water both we have seen but do you make a distinction you make a distinction between the false snake and the real rope you make a distinction even the snake you might have seen by mistake you make a distinction between a movie and what is going on in the movie and what's there in the mid cinema hall the two levels of reality so multiple levels of reality we are very much used to that's what Gordo pod is saying take it one step further this one which we consider as real this is also like a movie compared to the pure consciousness which you are now only when you realize only when you wake up does the dream become a dream for you only when we become real we realized that I am the tour iam I am Atma Brahman then this waking world can also be I won't say dismissed can also be characterized or identified as an appearance when you are in the midst of it it's very difficult to say this is unreal we make all sorts of mistakes if you try to do that we will say this is unreal unconsciously keeping this body as real that is not true or this is unreal including the body but keeping the mind as real the mind which is dismissing everything as unreal that is also not true all right lot of questions actually this fourth chapter is also full of questions when you say such things many people have questions yes yeah that is a good question and that's exactly what Iron Man you heard you metamoris that's what he's working on see if Ramakrishna's approach to the Harmony Allegiance is so much superior today we take a take that up but the problem there is gorup others approach or shankara's approach can be justified argued out to the minutest detail and defended against attackers because it's very logically consistent and every point you can defend it and you will see the reasonableness of it even if you don't agree with it I mean not a lot of people who will not agree with hula who have got their questions who are going to come now in this chapter but now Sri Ramakrishna's approach is very fulfilling it's very wholesome and it's it's really useful for the harmony of religion especially in our world today but a lot of questions can be raised about it so teachings of religions have contradictory opposite teachings are their dualism non-dualism if you say both are correct the god of other can say both are correct why because it puts dualism as an appearance and non-dualism as the reality reality and appearance can go together but two opposite realities cannot go together you cannot say that dualism is as real as non-dualism so do you see this is the problem then how will you reconcile it from Sri Ramakrishna's perspective so that is what iron Raj is working on it is an new approach if you ask me I am fully convinced of Sri Ramakrishna's approach just you need to give it a philosophical framework just one clue you can do it in this way sri ramakrishna himself has given the clue you can treat these as paths if you take up a framework dualistic framework will it take you to enlightenment and God realization yes if you take up this non-dualistic framework will it take you to enlightenment and God and what is the proof the proof is you will go beyond suffering with the claim here son of a service at SU kaha heat aha your welfare is accomplished you overcome suffering if those things are fulfilled then you will say this is true it works that works this works both are true they may not be philosophically compatible so that's one clue so so you're on Oh Krishna notice he treats it as different paths he's a different ways of attaining God realization golop are the interestingly later on he will say that dualism and non-dualism some like dualism some like non-duality I must admit the truth is beyond both the guru father says that it is very interesting because he has been teaching non-dualism all throughout then suddenly in a verse he will say do a to meet Chanti advaita meet Chanti no dry tama-chan take a channa adroit emission teach operate without later we were cheated at Tom some prefer duality some prefer non duality but the truth is beyond duality and non-duality now what is beyond duality and non-duality logically you cannot say but he admits it so yeah hold on to the questions don't forget it let me do one more verse at least and then we will come back now the opponents will come forward number three and remember go to power the strategy will be what he will not attack the opponent's he will show the mutual contradiction and he will claim victory see number three butis your jaw Timmy Chanti Wadena kg deva he a bhootish operate a de vivre ardent of Paris param some some claim that a pre-existing entity comes into being others claim that something that was not pre-existing has now come into being and they mutually contradict each other these Wise Ones D raha these various ones mutually contradict each other what does it mean the issue here is gorup are the startling claim that the universe has not been produced the universe has not been born nothing is produced and there's only one unchangeable consciousness to do now this is it seems completely contradictory to our experience our experience is a put in philosophical language there is a cause and there is an effect cause is that from mr. effect comes the cause produces the effect the effect is born from the cause so the example is clay is there and from clay a pot is created now in Indian philosophy there are different theories of causality different schools have different theories of causality here the two major positions are taken up one position is the position of what is called satkaryavada the sanskrit terms are karana means cause Guardium means effect carnem clay pot is karyam pot is the effect and clay is the cause clay is carnem parties or gutter is Guardium now what is the relationship between the two from the cup karanam the karyam has come that is everybody admits it and the relationship one according to one school the pot actually pre-existed in the clay in a potential form after all it is the clay alone which was changed into the pot so the pot pre-existed what was pre-existing in the cause the karyam pot was pre-existing in the car random clay and now it has been manifested it has been produced from the clay this is one perspective it is called such Caria vada Korea means effect such existing effect pre-existing before production pre-existing in some potential form and it's not as silly or at a strange as it sounds it is actually a pretty modern concept in one sense you see the tree is pre-existing in the seed now we understand genetics we understand DNA the entire information for the body for the tree was pre-existing in the seed form and that only manifests so South Korea pre-existing effect manifests that is causality cause becomes effect meets pre-existing effect in the cause manifests as the effect that is one position whose position Sankhya Sankhya philosophy a very powerful position and today's when you think about DNA and coming and how the body is produced according to pre-existing information it becomes very very logical actually so the universe is pre-existing in its cause from a normal God or whatever you call it and then it is produced it is manifested the opposite position is asatkaryavada the product the effect is new it did not pre exist in the cause so the part is a new creation yes clay has been made used to make the part but the part did not in any reasonable weight existed in the clay and there are lot of arguments for and against these are the ancient philosophies nyah-nyah vaisheshika which is asatkaryavada Sankhya yoga these all existed even during the time of Buddha in fact in Buddha's life that there he goes din before he became the Buddha event in search of different teachers and two of the teachers whom he mentions by name and he when he mentions their teachings there very clearly sangchien teachings and Patanjali Yoga teachings maybe the system had not been formulated by that time but the teachings are the same so these are very ancient philosophies and they have been fighting against each other for centuries for millennia so one is sout kadhi of other part exists in a potential form in the clay and then is produced another one is asatkaryavada what did not exist that part did not exist actually earlier and has been newly produced now these are the two two opposing camps buthe osteotomy Chianti pre and Buddha means pre-existing pre-existing thing is born say some body Naha catch it some some philosophers who sank in and abuta see a parade here are otherwise once say that non existing thing that not not pre-existing effect is now created so these are the and there are many many arguments for and against the satkaryavada pre-existing sanction he said he will say that of course the part has to exist in some form in the in the clay see the milk which the which produces the Kurds or yogurt the yogurt of the Kurds was there in a potential form in the milk otherwise you will not find you the classic example is mustard seeds and if you grind them it produces the mustard oil if you grind sand it will not produce mustard oil so that means there is something special in that mustard seed which you grind then you for you produce the oil there's something special in the milk from which due to certain processes curd is produced it will not be produced from sawdust so there is something unique in the cause which becomes the effect you cannot deny that the other group will say ah satkaryavada they will say that no how silly part was existing in the clay then why make a part at all if it's already there store water in the clay it will not work why are you calling it pot why are you calling it clay my not call the clay pot them so it in no reasonable sense was the pot pre-existing in the clay then the production would have no meaning at all why would a baby be born why would that implant sprout so there is something that really happens new you cannot say that it was already there and then the argument goes on a very subtle arguments are there what does he say go to father Paris param by Vedanta they dispute with each other but we do not dispute with them with what do we do we are very skillful we wait what will happen they will refute each other the next verse number 4 I will do that an end butum Nadja 'taken cheat butum neva Jyoti vivid on toad - I am Jotham copper entity this is the skill of goda father he says what had they accomplished they have only accomplished a lotta hoie that what we want to say how says when the NIA of a shaker school botany iron by Shikha they hold on to asatkaryavada when they say Bhutan na jayate a kindred pre-existing part is not born in the clay pre-existing part is not born and the opponent so so when they are fighting with each other the sanction is saying that the part pre-existed in the clay then the ayah will say no it did not pre exist in the clay what is born is not a pre-existing part when the song Qian attacks then the Iowa shaker they will say that you are saying that it's something new it did not exist earlier a butum Jyoti no it's not that something randomly came up something was there potentially in the clay so is something potentially in the DNA something potentially in the seed which is now born as the plant so non existing thing does not come into being say it's the sanket to deny occur and the Renick of it many argument says an existing thing does not come into being now there are only two ways either an existing thing is produced or a non existing thing is produced if existing thing is not produced non existing thing is not produced strong arguments are there on both sides we say there's no production at all that's the most logical point and that's what we have been saying all along that as a team without it there is no production at all one philosopher put it very nicely one pundit he's at this point he suddenly referred to bhagavad-gita saying I or Y or mug day ratham stop it whether our Krishna Arjuna says to Krishna take my chariot and put it between the two two great armies satkaryavada and asatkaryavada in the middle of them I come and say look you have refuted these people these people have refuted you what's the only logical outcome nothing has been produced there is no production at all and that's what we are saying a jar team cap int you are advertising kappa ante rising my philosophy Agathe wada unintended consequence of your fight you didn't intend it but what you have divided is the result is the logical consequence is that there is no production at all production causality illogical causality is illogical it doesn't work so we'll stop there take a couple of questions I think two people still have hands raised yes it is a logical level so Shankara Gorda pada see for example from Shankar's perspective they will admit everything yes dear evolution is there and that is at a biological level Yoga philosophy actually talks about evolution bodies of living beings developed by the evolution of clarity very interesting it almost is very Darwinian nature develops and that is that is seen in the bodies of living creatures and them of course the souls inhabit by turn more and more advanced body so you upgrade your computer better than better and better computer so that is an evolution in computer but you are not evolving with that you are the witness of the evolving computer more of your capacities manifest in a better computer similarly more of the potential of the Atman is manifest in better and better bodies swami vivekananda put it this way evolution of nature manifestation of the absolute Brahman is more and more manifest in nature nonliving things is just existence stones rocks planets then living beings prana comes into being life then mind comes into being then intelligence comes into being love comes into being so all of these manifestations are all in nature but there are reflections of Brahman the reflection of the certain Eicher see nature Anandi nature sub nature things exist nature not only they exist there is mind and thought and understanding Ananda nature there's not only existence and awareness but also love and joy and fulfillment all still in nature but they're reflections of the of Brahman evolution of nature manifestation of Brahman Brahman is not evolving another example Swami Vivekananda gave was there is the Sun and the closer and closer you go and they take pictures of the Sun you are getting a more accurate a more glorious blazing picture not that the Sun is changing the picture is changing because of perspective is changing the change of perspective is given by evolution of nature MA near Williams who translated who made the first Sanskrit English dictionary cermony l Williams he has given a comment he was one of the early British indologists he has given a comment that these ancient Hindus where Darwinists a thousand years before Darwin so in one sense evolution is accepted of course not the details of Darwinian evolution which has been worked out recently in biology but in one sense it's perfectly acceptable look at the - owatta for example the bodies of God they move from fish to tore toys to half animal half human being and so and so forth it it moves so kind of evolution was accepted only gordo pod or Shankara would dismiss it or not dismiss it would relegate it to very Harika level Turia does not evolve one more question formulas yes guys go on there is the data level where you say that you and I are different and there's in which you see I'm part of you now when it comes to the ACMA level if we say your voices your voice is breaking up if I say can you repeat that again at the admin level repeat that again we are one would it be more accurate to say because many to save me it is referring back to you know something which does not stay when you go to that level where there is one correct yes and no the danger of saying that I am one with God is the emphasis becomes if the emphasis is on the personality I this person and one with God it's wrong that's not what advaitha wants to say so wouldn't it be as Sangeeta said wouldn't it be better to say there is one one reality alone exists it's not me or God I am NOT I their God is also not God there but that also is not acceptable why because then what happens to me it distances it that reality from you what a joy to doubly the co-teaching of advaitha is a hum Brahma asked me talk to Amma see that thou art so that one which exists there's no doubt that there's only one which exists which is not a Jeeva not even Ishwara but that one is actually your real nature that's what a greater wants to stress this is what has to be grasped it is not so difficult to say that ultimately there is one reality and keep me out of it I don't want to be involved in all those things no it is your reality you are that one one thing but only you properly understood it yourself the danger is to keep the body mind that's why before that good washing is necessary of Waker dreamer deep sleeper it is not that the Waker the Vishwa is the entire reality it's not that the dreamer is the entirely reality not even the deep sleeper it is the Toria which is the reality and that Turia is I the real I and that that is M that is important to retain you should not let go of that if you let go of it then the you will not be helped there is an ultimate reality which is beyond Burton death which is pure existence consciousness bliss very good what is it to me so you are that reality that has to be realizable that will give you moksha yes yes so Rama is asking isn't God a father just being clever one philosophy negating another is still not proof of God upon others Advaitic perspective is there any value in this note that this is the fourth chapter he has already given arguments for the falsity of the world second chapter he has already given arguments independent arguments for the non duality of Brahman third chapter now what remains is objections from other philosophers from the different schools multiple schools of thought now it's up to you how will you deal with these objections typical approaches Shankara areas approach who will take up the objections each school one by one subject each school to a scrutiny first of all Shankar Acharya will answer the questions of those schools against advaitha and try to defend up the weight and then Shankar Acharya will go in an offensive he will attack those schools and show that they are and there is their logical problems with those schools themselves so that's the one approach the second approach which I mentioned was don't say anything at all about your your school point out the logical difficulties in that opponent school your own house is not in order what whatever what are you are thing about me so that is the white earned approach with under gorup others approach is a variation of that with under which I said in the beginning is it useful yes if you have a good knowledge of Indian philosophy you will begin to see his point if you actually take up which one will I select satkaryavada or asatkaryavada we will find neither is I mean there it becomes a question of preference then neither is logically stronger both have difficulties both have strong points against each other they mutually do contradict and self-destruct but then is it enough isn't there any independent approach to it some what is the implication for adwaita that will come in the next verse go to father will not leave it here this will go on for a long time what he will say is they mutually contradict each other we don't have to criticize them they criticize each other and self-destruct then he will give in the next verse which I am NOT touched the fifth verse will come fifth verse of fourth fifth verse 50 words will come where he will say that what is their big problem why are they getting into these contradictions now I will take it Advaitic perspective he will bring it out from fifths I think 6th 7th and 8th verses he will bring out the Adriatic perspective and he will say what is the big problem with the dualistic schools and he will show the big problem is causality itself their idea of causality one Brahmin is producing a separate world either from within itself or separately this idea itself is wrong I had mentioned it earlier in the when we are doing the third chapter see when you say clay produced but first you have a part then the idea of clay is introduced to us you see this part which you're holding is an effect karyam okay it has a cause carnem okay what is the cause clay so clay is the cause and part is the effect and there is a reason for doing this because the cause is usually superior to the effect of how cause with respect to the effect is immortal God is immortal with respect to the world what is immortality and what is mortality the same clay from eight the part was born so but is therefore the part but not for the clay and then it exists fair in the clay and it finally when the part is destroyed what remains the clay remains so clay immortal part is mortal clay relatively nityam part is an idiom so cause is more powerful than the effect no doubt that's why cause and effect talk is their issue arise cause world is effect but in doing this a serious problem has been introduced we begin to feel there is a cause there is a cause called clay and there is an effect called part and then what are how are the two related forgetting they are not two how are the two related did one produce the pot from inside a pre-existing part or is the pot a new thing which has been produced when you stop at that cause-effect level there's clay and pot this what's his name mmm Allen Watts he calls it the crackpot theory the crapper you have to go one step further and to see that the what you call the cause and what you call the effect is that one same reality which is neither cause nor effect that we did earlier in a production levity towards then it was there so next it will come Godfather will show this whole concept of causality god creating a universe and God creating us the G was is not true not ultimately true ultimately toria is not created into the universe toria is never becomes the g word so remember the two examples which he used in third chapter the two examples where pot and space example when there is a pot is the pot space created along with the pot no space is never really divided not that if you make a hundred pots there will be 100 little spaces no it looks like that but actually it is still one space is never divided so Gita says are we buck Tom djibouti HOV buck tommy was just hit them undivided are in all beings it appears to be divided so the Turia is never really divided into G words and remember the second example dream example it's about creation of the world whatever you saw in the dream after waking up you realize none of that was ever there I imagined in the mind all that sky and birds and trees and people all of those were just appearances which are part of my dream only the Dreaming mind was real similarly God our Father says into the air all of these appears not that they are really produced bacteria not that Toria is a cause and these are effects so cause and effect causality this is this is pushing towards so yes yes he's saying was do it again actually we did I cheat I karo tying the knowledge of Advaita to the hem of your cloth then do whatever you like yeah so he has said that does he have a mark of approval or not do it obviously always certainly he has but not in the sense that he's not you know making Mukti inferior if a devotee comes and as he would say he said in it is on record in the gospel aim of human life bhakti lab karate one addition attainment of devotion to God is the purpose of human life now how would you reconcile these two in saddam krishna says you don't have to reconcile your google maps i can give you alternative routes to say manhattan when you're coming from new jersey or somewhere and which how do you reconcile don't both are they all the routes are valid depending on where you are one may be better for you depending on your mental makeup your proclivities one approach may suit you what guru pod is doing is he is cutting down the others and establishing a traitor that was the style of philosophizing in those days yeah all right this is a productive session so yeah so we'll take it up next time Oh Shante Shante Shante hurry Hume that's at Shri Ramakrishna rapport now must to stay safe everybody let me see you all in the you gallery view yes please stay safe take care