Share with someone who needs this :) To Understand the True Nature of Reality and to Consciously Create the Life that you want to Live, watch our 22 Minute Powerful Masterclass, "The Conscious Creation Model" adhvaitha.com/ccvaluevideo
The absolute reality is beyond both Advaita and Dvaita. It is incomprehensible and unimaginable. Infact it is beyond all religions and philosophies. Its ridiculous to argue about which one is the truth when we can't even define consciousness.
Pranam 🙏🏼 Your channel is a true gem on deep philosophies from Sanatana Dharma. I never comment on these topics on social media because spirituality and self-realization are intimate experiences that are subtle treasures in one's journey. The only thing I want to express/share is this: As long as one identifies reality with the perception of individual ego/personality, one cannot experience that which is beyond and within reality. The dissolution of the individual mind/consciousness/ego in deep transcendental states is when one can have a glimpse of that infinity beyond duality. It takes many, many years of sadhana and sincere "desire" for liberation (mumukshuta) to experience the non-dual aspect of existence. Thanks for creating this space for true seekers.
This is a fantastic video. There is little nothing in English out there about Sri Ramanujacharya. Thank you. The mahavakya- tat tvam asi according to Sri Ramanuja declares outright that there is difference aka “thou” and “that”, while in one sense you are the same as that but also thou and that are differentiated.
Very nicely and succinctly explained. Looking forward to the next episode. I have heard that a great spiritual master, Sri Ramaraya Kavi, was raised in a Vaishnavite household but later on adopted the Advaita Siddhanta of Sri Adi Shankara and also wrote a rebuttal to the objections raised by Sri Ramanujacharya in his Bhagavad Gita Bhashya.
@@prasadcb3704 I came to know of Sri Ramaraya Kavi from one of Swami Omkarananda's discourses on the Gita. His Vedanta Sangraha is available (with English translation - Amazon has it; also free download of a different translation is available from Google). His Bhagavad Geeta Bashyarka Prakasika is the one where he supposedly refutes Sri Ramanuja's Gita Bhashya . This is available on Scribd - the original in Sanskrit. In Shankara - Ashankara Bhashya Vimarsha, he refutes the Sree Bhashyam. I myself have not read any of these treatises. Hope this helps.
Advitha is supreme. People couldn't understand it and created different philosophies. I got fantastic results in my life by adaptation of Advitha principles.
While advaita might have worked for you, that is not a testament to say it is true or that in general is good for the society. For instance advaita considers material achievements as illusory which is one of the reasons why science and technology never flourished as it did in the west.
@@delq advait means close the eye from outside and open it inside . The simple words Advait is just ruthless enquiry of what is truth or not . Then we find sometimes the material things are not true but other hand the material things is help for our wisdom journey and liberation from " I'm " ( अहम वृति ) i called as the tendency of ego . Kabir sahib was said " माया दो प्रकार की , एक मिलाए राम से एक नर्क लीजिए " that's is a core principle of maya in advait . ❤😊
@CMSayings-ue4fg all that is good except what history has to say about. The advent of advaita by Sankara was followed by large conquests and a gradual deterioration of the existing glory that prevailed. Take from it what you will.
Once Hanuman said to Shri Rama that sometimes I feel that there is no difference between you and me (Advaita), sometimes I feel myself to be a part of you (Visisthadvaita) and sometimes I feel like your servant (Dvaita). It depends on the perspective. History is filled with people who have experienced the infinite through all the paths. This clearly shows that all of them works and are valid. How did Meerabai attain the supreme bliss?
i had been following ADVAITA for more than 5 years, but I felt that something was missing in my life even though realizing the self according to ADVAITA. so I started asking some very important questions. Now I am following DVAIT, and now i am blissfull like never before . But i pray to ADIGURU SHANKARACHARYA from bottom of my heart because ,due to HIS blessings i am able to understand the actual message HE wants to Convey. HARE KRISHNA🙏
Just to clarify, 'Realizing the Self means attaining absolute fulfilment and bliss.' But I'm glad you are finding joy in a philosophy that suits you :)
That's why i love advait philosophy...God is beyond of everything he isn't bounded by anything....God is Everything that exists and also God is emptyness...God is existence and also at the same time god is non existence too ... He's just eternal and everything is simply THE GOD
The beauty of Hinduism or Sanatan dharma is to be an umbrella of all intellectual thoughts and philosophies, where one's thoughts, idealogy, and philosophies dodoesn't impose on another's beliefs. Within our Dharma, there are various Darshanas, Advaita, Dvaitha, Vishisdvaita, Shiva, Shakta, and even Atheism, beliefs in one God, beliefs in many Gods (rather Devathas), Jaina, Buddha, Charvaka, so on and so on. The invasions of westerners created all "isms" by dividing people by their following of Thoughts and/or Devathas. If one goes beyond by questioning every bit and seeking the truth, it becomes so clear how profound, logical and genuine is Sanathan dharma.
Beautiful video❤ Kindly please explain a similar comparison between Advaita philosphy and Kashmiri Shaivism, as the later also talks about a formless and perception less ParamShiva while also retaining the philosphy of Saguna brahaman.🙏
Nicely explained and summarised. Logically Advaita makes sense, literally if once reality was just one substance and one, it could never have become many and two. An infinite will always remain infinite, it can never become finite. But then we have a problem, because we experience a finite universe made up many substances and parts and many people. How could an infinite reality have given rise to a finite reality? Advaita answers the finite reality is Maya arising from avidya, we the atman identify with Maya as the illusory energy of Brahman and become superimposed on it, taking whatever Maya produces from this universe to this body to be us and thus we are caught up in Samara till we realise that we are Brahman Ok , all good. But there is a huge problem here that no advaitin has an answer for 1. Who becomes misidentified with Maya in the first place? Brahman becomes misidentified with Maya? How does Brahma forget he is Brahman? 2. Ok, if suppose we are Brahman who have forgotten we are Brahman, then who is running this universe in Brahmans absence? 3. If Brahman can forget once, then he can forget again, then this would liberation is temporary this cycle of forgetting and remembering goes on forever. 4. If we are Brahman, then why don't we all become realised when either of us become realised? Advaita has no answers to these questions. I know because i have asked the top swamis ot Advaita, and they have no answer. But there is an answer in ishvara vada. While jiva and ishvara maybe in essence the same, as Patanjali yoga shastra tells us, ishvara is a special purusha or soul that always remains transcendent and never enters into bondage with Maya. On the other hand, us jivas DO enter into bondages and can also break free of bondage. In other words jivas must be always distinct from ishvara and never completely identical. They can become ONE with ishvara, but not ishvara itself.
1. Who becomes misidentified with Maya? In Adhvaitha, Brahman does not actually become misidentified or forget itself. The appearance of misidentification is itself part of Maya. Brahman remains eternally as pure consciousness, untouched by Maya. What we call the “jiva” that seems to be in bondage is ultimately an illusory appearance within Brahman, not Brahman itself forgetting its nature. 2. Who is running the universe in Brahman's absence? There is no actual absence of Brahman. Brahman is the eternal substratum and reality underlying all appearances. The universe and its functioning are part of the illusory manifestation of Maya. 3. Can Brahman forget again after realization? In Adhvaitha, realization is not Brahman remembering something it forgot, but the dissolution of the illusory ignorance that was never truly real to begin with. 4. Why don't we all become realized when one person does? Each apparent individual jiva must overcome its own illusory ignorance. The realization of one jiva does not automatically dispel the ignorance of others, as each jiva's ignorance is its own apparent limitation. Regarding Ishvara and jivas always being distinct - Ahdvaitha would say this distinction is ultimately part of Maya as well. The highest truth in Ahdvaihta is the non-dual Brahman beyond all distinctions. Thank you.
@@adhvaitha thank you for replying and engaging my questions. With due respect to you I have already heard similar answers from Advaita gurus, but the answer is not satisfactory because it leads to an apparent contradiction of Advaita vada, literally not two and supports more vishshtadvaita(VA) vada that jiva, jagat and ishvara are distinct. Read what you are saying you are Brahman always is, Brahman is the absolute, pure unchanging eternal reality; Brahman is never subject to any change or modification and Brahman never enters into bondage. So who is entering into bondage? You have said it's jiva who is the one who is illusioned by Maya who itself not separate from Brahman but is a part of Brahmans energy. Then you are in fact admitting that jiva is distinct, because while Brahman is never changing and cannot be illusioned by his own Maya, jiva can and does. Jiva does enter into this illusion of samsara and it is jiva that does sadhana to leave the illusion of samsara. You also admit to the multiplicity of jivaa by admitting that every jiva must do their own sadhana, one jivas reaching liberation is not going to mean every jiva will become liberated. Effectively what your saying sounds like visesadvaia. What you are calling Brahman is ishvara of VA, the eternal, always transcendental, absolute reality that is the source of all; what you are calling Maya is Jagat of VA, the immanent or phenomenal reality of samsara the jiva enters and what you are calling jiva as a product of Maya is jiva of VA that toils through lifetimes to return to ishvara. Maybe you can argue that once jiva attains self realization and realizes it is Brahman then the illusion will end that it is distinct from Brahman. But even here we have a logical problem. If something has an end, it necessarily has a beginning in time. This means there was a time when jiva came under this illusion. This means jiva can again come under this illusion. Meaning jiva will eternally be subject to endless cycles of coming under illusion and hence will always be distinct.
As a muslim, I believe that the quintessential core of true Hinduism is best reflected in the doctrine of Sri Ramanuja. Both Buddhist anatmabad, and Shankaracharya' s nondual doctrines are grandiose and high flown, but not quite as consistent and relatable as what is propounded by Sri Ramanuja.
Thoughtful comparison As far as I know, adi Shankara established advaita vedata when other religions like buddhism were gaining popularity, and people were focusing more on karma kanda for material gain. To protect our dharma and to eliminate the samsaya among people and bring back the importance of spirituality he made an effort. Also, brahman can not be explained with words. the only thing scriptures and gurus can do is point us towards it.
The great Sri Ramkrishna Paramhans said, "As many faiths, so many paths." All the philosophies are true from their standpoint but none can explain the absolute as a whole because that is beyond human understanding. Its like 5 blind men touching different body parts of an elephant. One touches its tail and proclaims it to be a rope, other one touches its tusk and says that it is a pipe, somebody else touches its leg and declares that it is a pillar and so on. All of them are true but none could define it as a whole.
@@adhvaithayes everyone is free to subscribe to the path he likes. Sri Ramakrishna clearly stated that diversity is the basis of existence. Everyone's preferences cannot be the same. Among all the apparently diverse paths, lies a unity at the core.
There is no use of arguing which is right or wrong or we should say right or more right. From all accounts both Adi Shankara and Madhavacharya were realized souls. No one in the present age or in the times they were alive could stand upto them. So it is better for us to strive for realization and if we attain realization we can interpret reality as we realized it instead of going for literally arguments.
Debates and Enquiry were a big part of Sanatana Dharma. Even to accept and follow a spiritual path we need to intellectually enquire and find a path that suits us. We cannot and should not blindly accept anything.
Bro there are three are pillers in vedanta realization (1) Shruti (testimony of realized one) (2) yukti ( reason or logic) (3) Anubhav ( experience) One have to go with these three layers for the culmination of moksha
Not really. That is like saying both the models of the solar system, one where earth is at the center and the sun is at the center are both true which is an absurd statement. Dvaita and advaita are diametrically opposite views. They cant be both true at the same time.
real self or real atman is that consciousness which is inbulid(exist) in all beings. Is that brahama by adi shankaraachaary . And maya is the illusion and this illusion is perceived through our 'illusory self' . Because I have heard that maya root meaning is "from what we measure". Means that illusory self which only perceived maya (pain, hate, jealousy,.....) Am I right about shankar's philosophy??
First of all, each path is a darsanam by those 3 acharyas. Advaitha, vishishtadwaitha and dwaitha siddanthas are darsanam of an enlightened being each blessed with aparagnana of vedic and secondary litretures such as divya prabhandam (an esoteric texts). Each of them are giuded by divine experiences for them. That means none of them could be wrong. Because each path has shruthi references. Each has done poorvapaksha of other darsanam (View). That means what is the key to understand if one goes through those 3 acharyas are the boundary conditions. Each darsanam could potentially sound failed when the respective boundary conditions are changed. That means all could be taken as right or all could be taken as wrong. It is like the BP which is an statistical average and for an individual it might be different normal. Any spiritual advancements to an individual need personal experiential attainment. That means all these acharyas due to thier immense knowledge and love towards the rest, institutionalised their darsanam so that which ever appeals to anyone could pursue that particular path. It will be interesting to note that within those 3 main darsanas, there are msny variations of understanding its technicalities. For example advaitha itself has 14 versions. So people should gain indeapth knowledge, develop discipline in life, practise the spiritual activities, connect with divine and then try to understand what those great acharyas have provided as their darsanam. A darsanam is like a spiritual P. Hd. They travelled across the length and breadth of bharath to establish a sampradaya (path of worship based on their theses called Bhashyams ). In their time each defeated the stalwarts of other darsanam in their time. That means God want all these 3 paths to act as a tool for people to understand and connect with him. Take it in that way please. No more who is right and who is wrong as we dont have that divinity in us awakened yet
When heard about High level overview of these philosophies, Adhvaitha is the best solution for all our problems, Buddist shunya , Taoist relativeness also solves many problems. then if we go other philosophies Visistaadhvaitha, Dvaithaadhvaitha looks like some form of fear to compare ourselves to god self. Modern world Islam also fall into this Dvaithaadhvaita category, giving sacredness to things and thoughts and holyness to ultimate power. As per me that creates more illusion and making things to be difficult to attain solution. Every wants to define God. but no one wants to understand their true nature. Adhvaitha starts from you and ends with you.
Vishnumaayaa is the Devee eclipsing the Brahman. Everything is one and same but behave differently. One man never behaves uniformly always, changes from time to time. One man is a son, husband and father at the same time. If you can see the Sun now the Americans see the Moon. Both can see both by the use of TECHNOLOGY. That technology is to be acquired by Practice in "seeing" Brahman as Everything. When you "see" the Reality all doubts disappear. As Ramakrishna advised just catch hold of Devee the Mother easy is the Way Immortality. ज्ञानिनामपि चेतांसि देवी भगवती हि सा बलादाकृष्य मोहाय महामाया प्रयच्छति। However intelligent and learned a man will be led to idiocy by the Supreme Mother. Reside in Mother leaving all falsehood and EGO, Om🔥❤️🎉👻
I beleived in Dwaita when i was younger. But as i grew old it seemed very illogical and not so very convincing. Then i discovered Bhagawatpada Shankaracharya and his Bhashyas and then on everything made sense to me. I am ever greatful to that Jagadguru and My own Guru for guiding me to the real meaning of Vedas and the Bhagwad Gita. Advaita is the ultimate and the only Truth. Hari Om
In my view All of them are true but in different level of realities Adavita is absolute Dvait is what we experience now Vishitha advait is the connection devotees feel while worshiping god
I am basically from an Adviata family. But I was wondering always how could there be Philosophies like Dhwata and Vishistadhwaita in presence of Adhwaita Philosophy. So I started reading the other Philosophies basically to refute them. It was really shocking to me that the Philosophy I believed earlier was very basic. Many people do not read the other acharyas Philosophy in detail and hence their understanding is very shallow. Adhwaita is simple and very easy to understand. Srimad Ramanujacharya siddhanta is much more advanced compared to Sri Shankaracharyas Siddhanta and Srimad Madhwacharyas siddhanta is even more advanced than Srimad Ramanujacharyas and Dhwaita needs extreme processing abilities which is not possible for ordinary human beings .
It is not about how simple or advanced a philosophy is, it is simply about the 'Truth'. 'Truth' that is universal. 'Truth' that can be realized and experienced first-hand. 'Truth' that can be validated by science, and enlightened beings not just in India, but across the world. This 'Truth' is Advaita. From the Upanishads to Adi Shankaracharya, Ramana Maharshi, Vivekananda, Rumi, to Eckhart Tolle, all speak of the same Truth in different ways.
In one version you have a personal evolving Soul...in Advaita Vedanta, they don't stress the Soul. However, I prefer Sri Aurobindo's Integral Path, which includes the One and the Many. I know the Soul is real, I am Self Realized at the Soul level.
If its argued that Adi Shankara teachings and Advita vedanta is illogical and then the same argument should also apply to Upanishad teachings considered to be most profound which has been accepted by even Western philosophers, world renowned Swami Vivekanada and Scientists.
Sri Ramana Maharishi and Sri Nisargadatta were self realised enlightened masters who got realisation while alive and explained the teachings of this self realisation. Through this way the world was able to understand self realisation or enlightenment which we call advaita vedanta. Before the entire world was created or manifested there was nothing or void . Hence Brahman too was void or formless. And this formless void created all forms. If you take the teachings of the Sikhs and their holy book the Guru granth and the opening stanza Ek Omkar which describes as without form and other attributes. The james web telescopes is sending us photos of trillions of galaxies trillions of light years away and scientists say that that the entire universe has no ending no boundaries and is ever expanding. Who created all this.
Dwaita is the ultimate philosophy, requiring strong logical reasoning and intellect to fully comprehend. Many scholars transitioned from Advaita to Dwaita after realizing its profound truth.
No , theism means believe in the truth ( Braham ) , atheist means believe in which things that cutout from knowing our true self , distracted from aatmagyan , do not continuous watching the thought .
Because Adi Sankara was born in Kerala, as per Keralite traditions , he says knowledge is moksha sadhana. After leaving this body, if Adi Sankara too has become Brahman, not all become one with Brahman but many are reborn in great number of birth-death cycles. This is not explained in Adaita.
Christian Gnostic checking in. And just like Kabir I'm the Lowest of the Low. See my blog, Spiderman Is Not Stan Lee. I've just found Christian Gnostic teachings (sort of) in India via the Anurag Sagar... Nonduality is exactly what Yaldabaoth would teach humanity. That 'he' is ALL. Not true according to the Christian Gnostics.... But it is true there are non dual Christian Gnostic sects (the Valentinian's)...
19:20 so you cooked a nice sambhar and put two drops of urine by trying to justify Advaita because Tao and Sufism says same ? Really whom are you trying to impress ? You don't try to cook reasons to justify as this is not your Social Studies paper so you write points for marks. The comparison is out of place.
Are you related to sai deepak? Advaita is satya, Vishista advaita says maya and brahman are inseparable, whereas you need maya to realize the true essence of brahman, brahman itself is nirguna there is a requirement of a jeeva or a wtiness who can experience brahman, and the best position to experience brahman is not with a human body but have thw body of narayana where he isnt reduced to 5 sence organs, there you can experience all concepts known to you and unknown to you. And pl dont use that triangle eye thumbnail, You know why
Advait vedanta is the what and vishisht advaita for the how, gyan is hard bhakti is easy. Bcoz gyan is not just logical understanding but also aparokshanubhuti, i need to learn the knowledge from adi shankaracharya and i need to learn bhakti from ramanujacharya, ramanujacharya logic is flawed and adi shankaracharya bhakti is flawed This is fact!!
The heading is undesirable. Hindus are already divided in every way and this has given way for weakening of the religion vis-a-vis onslaught by other religions. All isms should be taken as complementing ones for sanathana dharma to thrive without any problem.
@@adhvaithaThe three great acharyas were not contemporaries, but lived in different periods. Hence there was no scope for interaction among them and as such there was no scope for defending each others views though ultimately all views should converge to the same. Fortunately Swami Vivekananda took all the three philosophies as evolving ones from the perspective of an ordinary man who from being ignorant initially, can reach a level of a realised one ultimately, by having initial belief in dwaitha and finally a realised belief in advaitha by passing through the intermediate stage of vishishtadvaitha of Ramanuja.
Both are outdated spirituality. Without truthfulness both dont get anywhere with their blind faiths. Both talked of knowledge that doesnt conduce any enlightened state except ones own life. They wasted time for spiritual ego and that is their sins.
@@adhvaitha then let the truth be hidden and suppressed. The definition of judging is unbiased then its righteousness and if its biased it is ignorance. The man who judges with bias is also in ignorance unlike the other. I dont see any divinity in philosophical display rather than being real and being in the said state . Both were arguing for established religions and their spiritual egos. Its caller spiritual ego. A blind man denies spiritual ego and is narcissistic. Advaita failed in many places because none of todays gurus are enlightened fully. It means left and right hemispheres equally developed and it can be verified by neuro science and devices. Man, i worked in para psychology level to other internal arts. I know who is enlightened or not by their fight for truth vs their lived out life for truth. The absolute truth is not shankara nor advaita . Advaita doesnt deal with inner shadow but suppress and hid it so the left hemisphere doesnt grow nor correct its logical flaws delusions . They suffer from inner child wounds. Thus they may not have mana suddhi. A deluded man cant have mana suddhi. It then depends on who is deluding. Delusion means false beliefs. Adviata gave us half truth not full truth. Its an outdated culture nothing divine in it because it never made a man fully enlightened except half enlightenment, that is the right hemisphere or divine brain enlight. Its only a half step when the other hemisphere have torrents of logical flaws. So a wise man corrects himself against truth and logic to be free from such flaws . The synthesis of both brain is full enlightenment. Advaita fails here and its followers as they hardly see within their own flaws. How can a blind man see within? He has to be truthful and unbiased so that benchmarking truthful honest can help him recorrect the faulty patterns or files. A common man who memorised ad hominem attacks may snide on this because he believes in argument from authority not looking at facts and truths. His source is non verifiable scriptures and personalities . They failed to show one living example of enlightened person not even by sarva priyananda. If he has inner light the syntheis of both hemispheres, lets verify with rain analysers and neuro cranial diodes. Lets take it serious rather than verbatims and argument. Let it face the test of fire. If it or they live up to their claims, just like zen monks, they must be transparent and willing to admit that they know only theories not the possessors of real inner states. Why learning swimming theories when all you have to do is step in and practice? Is theory forever making anyone practical? Can a driver drive a car by learning books or by what? The wise mam without bias must answer without total honesty! I dont see religions or avatars or gods are real contemporary or uptodate. Even the consciousness even corrupt by evils. Perhaps you may be thinking of dunning kruger effect with a bit of over idealism. May I rest my case? Oh dear Lord!
Sanakra's doctrine is definitely wrong - it is inconsistent with Vaidika siddhanta and illogical as well - it can't resolve the inherent problem with the way it treats "maya" as a duality. Madhavacarya, Ramanujacarya, Vallabhacarya and Sri Caitanya all disagree with Sankara.
Maya dose not exist in atman which is brahman the undifferentiated consciousness.our mind(chitha) is a reflecting mirror in that self shining consciousness more like the sun and its reflection on different pots of water the impurities in the water are thoughts and emotions after purifying the waters it reflect the sun properly but it's still in duality. But what happens if we pour down the water the real sun alone exist before and after it's still alone existed untouched by all the chaos of mind matter and body likewise truth absolute alone exist.and that is the real you.He who understands with the help of his personal self mergers back into the impersonal self. He who understands
@@GpGp-u5ereal self or real atman is that consciousness which is inbulid(exist) in all beings. Is that brahama by adi shankaraachaary . And maya is the illusion and this illusion is perceived through our 'illusory self' . Because I have heard that maya root meaning is "from what we measure". Means that illusory self which only perceived maya (pain, hate, jealousy,.....) Am I right about shankar's philosophy??
Self-enquiry steps suggest that if someone says something is wrong, before making such a statement, he or she should find out who says that and find who he is by following the steps given in Self-enquiry techniques. ( Please refer to world famous book "Who am I" ,available all over the world in almost all languages including most of the Indian languages)
@@adhvaitha not on this point of "mayavada". Everything is and belongs to Brahma. Maya is not separate and maya exists and is real, it simply must be understood ontologically. Considering Brahma's svarupa as illusiory, under the wrong imagined definition of the Mayavada doctrine is nonsensical.
While I appreciate a mostly unbiased representation of Vishishtadvaita Vedanta, I feel like Vishishtadvaita resonates deeply with people's natural intuitions. Nobody would say that the drop of the water is the ocean or the spark is the same as a blazing inferno or the tree is the forest. It is naturally understood and intuitive that the tree, the spark and the drop are part of the whole, just like Jiva being part of the whole of the Brahman. The mere fact that Advaita and Dvaita choose to cherry pick Shrutis that only aligns with their worldview while ignoring the other, is a defeater for both advaita and dvaita. Only Vishishtadvaita does the job of reconciling non dual (abedha) shruthis with Bedha (dual) shrutis to form a complete philosophy. Without Vishishtadvaita, whole of vedanta would be a cherry picked mess contradicting other cherry picked mess. For this reason alone, Vishishtadvaita stands Supreme. As for Vishishtadvaita being incompatible with Shaivism and Shaktaism, there are Shaiva/Shaakta variants of Vishishtadvaita too. In any case, Vishnu is the one who is called as Narayana in the Vedas. The Vedas proclaim Vishnu as the Supreme. So it's the Shaivas and Shaktas who are at odds with the Vedas. Vishishtadvaita is actually way more universal and practical for all of humanity than advaita. The path of Bhakti and Sharanagathi is easier and universal to everyone than the path of gyana which is difficult to cultivate. That led to the orthodoxy and the worsening of caste system and exclusivity of Brahmins within Hinduism, while Vishishtadvaita opened gates for all into the fold of Hinduism. Ultimately, advaita, like Buddhism, suffers from the epistemic problem. If you claim that anything but the Brahman is Mitya, then all the knowledge about Brahman from scriptures like Vedas and Upanishads are also not real. And there remains no basis for any claim an Advaitin could make. Unlike Vishishtadvaita which has epistemic certainty.
Thank you. Here is my response. 1. Just because now we feel as limited beings, this does not mean this is the absolute truth. Going from finite to infinite is 'Enlightenment'. 2. Advaita doesn't cherry-pick Shrutis. It explains all Shrutis. 3. Vedas mention many things, they use many names. Upanishads talk about the ultimate reality/principle called 'Brahman'. Even Brahmasutras, they strongly support Advaita Vedanta. 4. Devotion and surrender is a part of Advaita Vedanta also. 5. There is no epistemic problem. Only Brahman is, as per Advaita Vedanta. Yes all scriptures are also simply pointers to Brahman, they do not have the same ontological status as Brahman.
@@adhvaitha @adhvaitha 1. But how does the finite become the infinite ? It become part of the infinite but the part is never the whole. 2. Does Advaita and Dvaita also incorporate bedha and Abedha shruthis respectively ? I don't believe so. Which is one of the reasons Vishishtadvaita came about. To take all three types of Shrutis and combine them into one body of work. Hence its called the Ghataka philosophy that reconciles all seemingly irreconcilable parts of Shrutis. 3. There are Vishishtadvaita variants considering Shiva as the Supreme too. So that point shall be discarded. I have looked into verses which proclaim Vishnu as Supreme. But ultimately I don't know the Vedas in entirety. So I don't wish to contest that point. 4. Can someone attain moksha through Bhakti and sharanagathi even if they don't have gyana of the Brahman, as per advaita ? I'm sure Brahmasutras support advaita vedanta but it also adds so many qualifiers, at which point it becomes Vishishtadvaita. 5. How can we know that they are pointing towards the Brahman when they are themselves illusory?
![Debunking 7 Great Objections on Advaita Vedanta: Here's the TRUTH! [Sapta-Vidha Anupapatti]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/G97nP28Holo/mqdefault.jpg)
![Debunking 7 Great Objections on Advaita Vedanta: Here's the TRUTH! [Sapta-Vidha Anupapatti]](/img/tr.png)
Share with someone who needs this :)
To Understand the True Nature of Reality and to Consciously Create the Life that you want to Live, watch our 22 Minute Powerful Masterclass, "The Conscious Creation Model" adhvaitha.com/ccvaluevideo
This channel is very underrated...
🙂🙏
The absolute reality is beyond both Advaita and Dvaita. It is incomprehensible and unimaginable. Infact it is beyond all religions and philosophies. Its ridiculous to argue about which one is the truth when we can't even define consciousness.
Ofcourse the absolute reality is beyond all philosophies. Advaita Vedanta by itself says this, philosophies are simply guides and pointers to that.
Madhavacharya in anuvakyavana stated that " All the philosophy that I countered are eternal and true just like dvaitha"
@@adhvaitha As an ex-Buddhist, the Buddha also said he's just a pointer. Also Zen painting, "The finger pointing to the moon".
Pranam 🙏🏼 Your channel is a true gem on deep philosophies from Sanatana Dharma. I never comment on these topics on social media because spirituality and self-realization are intimate experiences that are subtle treasures in one's journey. The only thing I want to express/share is this: As long as one identifies reality with the perception of individual ego/personality, one cannot experience that which is beyond and within reality. The dissolution of the individual mind/consciousness/ego in deep transcendental states is when one can have a glimpse of that infinity beyond duality. It takes many, many years of sadhana and sincere "desire" for liberation (mumukshuta) to experience the non-dual aspect of existence. Thanks for creating this space for true seekers.
Yes. 🙂🙏Thanks for sharing.
This is a fantastic video. There is little nothing in English out there about Sri Ramanujacharya. Thank you. The mahavakya- tat tvam asi according to Sri Ramanuja declares outright that there is difference aka “thou” and “that”, while in one sense you are the same as that but also thou and that are differentiated.
🙂🙏
Thank you soo much for this video ♥️🙏 needed these kind of information on YT. Was searching from a long time..
Glad it was helpful!
Very nicely and succinctly explained. Looking forward to the next episode. I have heard that a great spiritual master, Sri Ramaraya Kavi, was raised in a Vaishnavite household but later on adopted the Advaita Siddhanta of Sri Adi Shankara and also wrote a rebuttal to the objections raised by Sri Ramanujacharya in his Bhagavad Gita Bhashya.
Thank you 🙂🙏
@rravi1045, can you kindly give a few more words/lines on Sri Ramaraya Kavi ?
I'd like to read his explanation to help myself understand better.
@@prasadcb3704 I came to know of Sri Ramaraya Kavi from one of Swami Omkarananda's discourses on the Gita. His Vedanta Sangraha is available (with English translation - Amazon has it; also free download of a different translation is available from Google). His Bhagavad Geeta Bashyarka Prakasika is the one where he supposedly refutes Sri Ramanuja's Gita Bhashya . This is available on Scribd - the original in Sanskrit. In Shankara - Ashankara Bhashya Vimarsha, he refutes the Sree Bhashyam. I myself have not read any of these treatises. Hope this helps.
@@prasadcb3704 Lectures by Acharya Sadaji on Vedanta Sangraha by Sri Ramaraya Kavi have been uploaded on TH-cam by Advaita Academy. FYI.
Advitha is supreme. People couldn't understand it and created different philosophies. I got fantastic results in my life by adaptation of Advitha principles.
🙂🙏
While advaita might have worked for you, that is not a testament to say it is true or that in general is good for the society. For instance advaita considers material achievements as illusory which is one of the reasons why science and technology never flourished as it did in the west.
@@delq it's not about material or non material, it's about living peacefully with what is there
@@delq advait means close the eye from outside and open it inside . The simple words Advait is just ruthless enquiry of what is truth or not . Then we find sometimes the material things are not true but other hand the material things is help for our wisdom journey and liberation from " I'm " (
अहम वृति ) i called as the tendency of ego . Kabir sahib was said " माया दो प्रकार की , एक मिलाए राम से एक नर्क लीजिए " that's is a core principle of maya in advait . ❤😊
@CMSayings-ue4fg all that is good except what history has to say about. The advent of advaita by Sankara was followed by large conquests and a gradual deterioration of the existing glory that prevailed. Take from it what you will.
Once Hanuman said to Shri Rama that sometimes I feel that there is no difference between you and me (Advaita), sometimes I feel myself to be a part of you (Visisthadvaita) and sometimes I feel like your servant (Dvaita). It depends on the perspective. History is filled with people who have experienced the infinite through all the paths. This clearly shows that all of them works and are valid. How did Meerabai attain the supreme bliss?
Yes, what Advaita says is that at the ultimate level, there are no differences.
❤❤❤
I was looking for this video. Thank youuuu
🙂🙏
Great explanation. I couldn't agree more with the points mentioned by u about the practicality of Advaita Vedanta.
🙂🙏
Very well explained 🙏... Advaitha is the ultimate... 🙏
🙂🙏
i had been following ADVAITA for more than 5 years, but I felt that something was missing in my life even though realizing the self according to ADVAITA. so I started asking some very important questions. Now I am following DVAIT, and now i am blissfull like never before . But i pray to ADIGURU SHANKARACHARYA from bottom of my heart because ,due to HIS blessings i am able to understand the actual message HE wants to Convey. HARE KRISHNA🙏
Just to clarify, 'Realizing the Self means attaining absolute fulfilment and bliss.' But I'm glad you are finding joy in a philosophy that suits you :)
@@adhvaitha once one realizes the self the one disappears.
That's why i love advait philosophy...God is beyond of everything he isn't bounded by anything....God is Everything that exists and also God is emptyness...God is existence and also at the same time god is non existence too ... He's just eternal and everything is simply THE GOD
🙂🙏
The beauty of Hinduism or Sanatan dharma is to be an umbrella of all intellectual thoughts and philosophies, where one's thoughts, idealogy, and philosophies dodoesn't impose on another's beliefs.
Within our Dharma, there are various Darshanas, Advaita, Dvaitha, Vishisdvaita, Shiva, Shakta, and even Atheism, beliefs in one God, beliefs in many Gods (rather Devathas), Jaina, Buddha, Charvaka, so on and so on.
The invasions of westerners created all "isms" by dividing people by their following of Thoughts and/or Devathas.
If one goes beyond by questioning every bit and seeking the truth, it becomes so clear how profound, logical and genuine is Sanathan dharma.
Yes 🙂🙏
Very good narration. You got the essence for us.
Thank you 🙂🙏
Beautiful video❤ Kindly please explain a similar comparison between Advaita philosphy and Kashmiri Shaivism, as the later also talks about a formless and perception less ParamShiva while also retaining the philosphy of Saguna brahaman.🙏
Thank you. Will try in future, as I know very little about Kashmiri Shaivism. 🙂🙏
Kashmir Shaivism is Advaitic in nature but considers the world as real. Everything as manifestation of ParamShiv
Nicely explained and summarised. Logically Advaita makes sense, literally if once reality was just one substance and one, it could never have become many and two. An infinite will always remain infinite, it can never become finite.
But then we have a problem, because we experience a finite universe made up many substances and parts and many people. How could an infinite reality have given rise to a finite reality? Advaita answers the finite reality is Maya arising from avidya, we the atman identify with Maya as the illusory energy of Brahman and become superimposed on it, taking whatever Maya produces from this universe to this body to be us and thus we are caught up in Samara till we realise that we are Brahman
Ok , all good. But there is a huge problem here that no advaitin has an answer for
1. Who becomes misidentified with Maya in the first place? Brahman becomes misidentified with Maya? How does Brahma forget he is Brahman?
2. Ok, if suppose we are Brahman who have forgotten we are Brahman, then who is running this universe in Brahmans absence?
3. If Brahman can forget once, then he can forget again, then this would liberation is temporary this cycle of forgetting and remembering goes on forever.
4. If we are Brahman, then why don't we all become realised when either of us become realised?
Advaita has no answers to these questions. I know because i have asked the top swamis ot Advaita, and they have no answer.
But there is an answer in ishvara vada. While jiva and ishvara maybe in essence the same, as Patanjali yoga shastra tells us, ishvara is a special purusha or soul that always remains transcendent and never enters into bondage with Maya. On the other hand, us jivas DO enter into bondages and can also break free of bondage. In other words jivas must be always distinct from ishvara and never completely identical. They can become ONE with ishvara, but not ishvara itself.
1. Who becomes misidentified with Maya?
In Adhvaitha, Brahman does not actually become misidentified or forget itself. The appearance of misidentification is itself part of Maya. Brahman remains eternally as pure consciousness, untouched by Maya. What we call the “jiva” that seems to be in bondage is ultimately an illusory appearance within Brahman, not Brahman itself forgetting its nature.
2. Who is running the universe in Brahman's absence?
There is no actual absence of Brahman. Brahman is the eternal substratum and reality underlying all appearances. The universe and its functioning are part of the illusory manifestation of Maya.
3. Can Brahman forget again after realization?
In Adhvaitha, realization is not Brahman remembering something it forgot, but the dissolution of the illusory ignorance that was never truly real to begin with.
4. Why don't we all become realized when one person does?
Each apparent individual jiva must overcome its own illusory ignorance. The realization of one jiva does not automatically dispel the ignorance of others, as each jiva's ignorance is its own apparent limitation.
Regarding Ishvara and jivas always being distinct - Ahdvaitha would say this distinction is ultimately part of Maya as well. The highest truth in Ahdvaihta is the non-dual Brahman beyond all distinctions.
Thank you.
@@adhvaitha thank you for replying and engaging my questions. With due respect to you I have already heard similar answers from Advaita gurus, but the answer is not satisfactory because it leads to an apparent contradiction of Advaita vada, literally not two and supports more vishshtadvaita(VA) vada that jiva, jagat and ishvara are distinct. Read what you are saying you are Brahman always is, Brahman is the absolute, pure unchanging eternal reality; Brahman is never subject to any change or modification and Brahman never enters into bondage. So who is entering into bondage? You have said it's jiva who is the one who is illusioned by Maya who itself not separate from Brahman but is a part of Brahmans energy. Then you are in fact admitting that jiva is distinct, because while Brahman is never changing and cannot be illusioned by his own Maya, jiva can and does. Jiva does enter into this illusion of samsara and it is jiva that does sadhana to leave the illusion of samsara. You also admit to the multiplicity of jivaa by admitting that every jiva must do their own sadhana, one jivas reaching liberation is not going to mean every jiva will become liberated.
Effectively what your saying sounds like visesadvaia. What you are calling Brahman is ishvara of VA, the eternal, always transcendental, absolute reality that is the source of all; what you are calling Maya is Jagat of VA, the immanent or phenomenal reality of samsara the jiva enters and what you are calling jiva as a product of Maya is jiva of VA that toils through lifetimes to return to ishvara.
Maybe you can argue that once jiva attains self realization and realizes it is Brahman then the illusion will end that it is distinct from Brahman. But even here we have a logical problem. If something has an end, it necessarily has a beginning in time. This means there was a time when jiva came under this illusion. This means jiva can again come under this illusion. Meaning jiva will eternally be subject to endless cycles of coming under illusion and hence will always be distinct.
@@RajSingh-xn8qdyour logic and argument is simply irrefutable.
Great effort, thank you for your time and effort we need this as younger generation is gone while west is picking up on our philosophies.
Very nice explanation
Thanks and welcome 🙂🙏
As a muslim, I believe that the quintessential core of true Hinduism is best reflected in the doctrine of Sri Ramanuja. Both Buddhist anatmabad, and Shankaracharya' s nondual doctrines are grandiose and high flown, but not quite as consistent and relatable as what is propounded by Sri Ramanuja.
For me, it's not about what is more 'relatable'. It's about what's more true, and can I experience this truth for myself?
@adhvaitha congratulations for experiencing the TRUTH.
Thoughtful comparison
As far as I know, adi Shankara established advaita vedata when other religions like buddhism were gaining popularity, and people were focusing more on karma kanda for material gain. To protect our dharma and to eliminate the samsaya among people and bring back the importance of spirituality he made an effort.
Also, brahman can not be explained with words. the only thing scriptures and gurus can do is point us towards it.
🙂🙏
Vishistadvaita is Advaita for the emotional heart
Advaita is Vishistadvaita for the intelligent mind
Swami SriDattaDev SatChitAnanda
🙂🙏
The world is a subjective reality. Ramana Maharshi also said," The self of the Advaitans is the God of the Bhaktas(Dvaitans)."
🙂🙏
The great Sri Ramkrishna Paramhans said, "As many faiths, so many paths." All the philosophies are true from their standpoint but none can explain the absolute as a whole because that is beyond human understanding. Its like 5 blind men touching different body parts of an elephant. One touches its tail and proclaims it to be a rope, other one touches its tusk and says that it is a pipe, somebody else touches its leg and declares that it is a pillar and so on. All of them are true but none could define it as a whole.
Yes. But ultimately Ramakrishna Paramahansa and Rami Krishna Mission subscribes to and teaches Advaita Vedanta. [Even today.]
@@adhvaithayes everyone is free to subscribe to the path he likes. Sri Ramakrishna clearly stated that diversity is the basis of existence. Everyone's preferences cannot be the same. Among all the apparently diverse paths, lies a unity at the core.
There is no use of arguing which is right or wrong or we should say right or more right. From all accounts both Adi Shankara and Madhavacharya were realized souls. No one in the present age or in the times they were alive could stand upto them. So it is better for us to strive for realization and if we attain realization we can interpret reality as we realized it instead of going for literally arguments.
Debates and Enquiry were a big part of Sanatana Dharma. Even to accept and follow a spiritual path we need to intellectually enquire and find a path that suits us. We cannot and should not blindly accept anything.
Blind faith is always dangerous. Scrutiny of any claim is essential in understanding the truth whether it is spirituality or science.
Bro there are three are pillers in vedanta realization
(1) Shruti (testimony of realized one)
(2) yukti ( reason or logic)
(3) Anubhav ( experience)
One have to go with these three layers for the culmination of moksha
I don't think madavacharya realised soul. Once realisation occurs there will be no duality. It is all union.
Not really. That is like saying both the models of the solar system, one where earth is at the center and the sun is at the center are both true which is an absurd statement. Dvaita and advaita are diametrically opposite views. They cant be both true at the same time.
real self or real atman is that consciousness which is inbulid(exist) in all beings. Is that brahama by adi shankaraachaary .
And maya is the illusion and this illusion is perceived through our 'illusory self' .
Because I have heard that maya root meaning is "from what we measure". Means that illusory self which only perceived maya (pain, hate, jealousy,.....)
Am I right about shankar's philosophy??
1. Self = Atman = Brahman.
2. Illusory self = ego [due to avidya/ignorance]
3. Through the illusory self, what we experience is 'Maya'.
Sanaatana dharma mother of all religions
Satyameva jayathe
🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
🙂🙏
12:08 it is not Bakthi which liberate but Prapatti... Both are different 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
🙂🙏
First of all, each path is a darsanam by those 3 acharyas. Advaitha, vishishtadwaitha and dwaitha siddanthas are darsanam of an enlightened being each blessed with aparagnana of vedic and secondary litretures such as divya prabhandam (an esoteric texts). Each of them are giuded by divine experiences for them. That means none of them could be wrong. Because each path has shruthi references. Each has done poorvapaksha of other darsanam (View).
That means what is the key to understand if one goes through those 3 acharyas are the boundary conditions.
Each darsanam could potentially sound failed when the respective boundary conditions are changed. That means all could be taken as right or all could be taken as wrong. It is like the BP which is an statistical average and for an individual it might be different normal.
Any spiritual advancements to an individual need personal experiential attainment. That means all these acharyas due to thier immense knowledge and love towards the rest, institutionalised their darsanam so that which ever appeals to anyone could pursue that particular path. It will be interesting to note that within those 3 main darsanas, there are msny variations of understanding its technicalities. For example advaitha itself has 14 versions.
So people should gain indeapth knowledge, develop discipline in life, practise the spiritual activities, connect with divine and then try to understand what those great acharyas have provided as their darsanam. A darsanam is like a spiritual P. Hd.
They travelled across the length and breadth of bharath to establish a sampradaya (path of worship based on their theses called Bhashyams ). In their time each defeated the stalwarts of other darsanam in their time.
That means God want all these 3 paths to act as a tool for people to understand and connect with him. Take it in that way please.
No more who is right and who is wrong as we dont have that divinity in us awakened yet
When heard about High level overview of these philosophies, Adhvaitha is the best solution for all our problems, Buddist shunya , Taoist relativeness also solves many problems. then if we go other philosophies Visistaadhvaitha, Dvaithaadhvaitha looks like some form of fear to compare ourselves to god self. Modern world Islam also fall into this Dvaithaadhvaita category, giving sacredness to things and thoughts and holyness to ultimate power.
As per me that creates more illusion and making things to be difficult to attain solution.
Every wants to define God. but no one wants to understand their true nature. Adhvaitha starts from you and ends with you.
Yes. 🙂🙏
Vishnumaayaa is the Devee eclipsing the Brahman. Everything is one and same but behave differently. One man never behaves uniformly always, changes from time to time. One man is a son, husband and father at the same time. If you can see the Sun now the Americans see the Moon. Both can see both by the use of TECHNOLOGY. That technology is to be acquired by Practice in "seeing" Brahman as Everything. When you "see" the Reality all doubts disappear. As Ramakrishna advised just catch hold of Devee the Mother easy is the Way Immortality. ज्ञानिनामपि चेतांसि देवी भगवती हि सा बलादाकृष्य मोहाय महामाया प्रयच्छति। However intelligent and learned a man will be led to idiocy by the Supreme Mother. Reside in Mother leaving all falsehood and EGO, Om🔥❤️🎉👻
🙂🙏
I beleived in Dwaita when i was younger. But as i grew old it seemed very illogical and not so very convincing. Then i discovered Bhagawatpada Shankaracharya and his Bhashyas and then on everything made sense to me. I am ever greatful to that Jagadguru and My own Guru for guiding me to the real meaning of Vedas and the Bhagwad Gita. Advaita is the ultimate and the only Truth.
Hari Om
Hari Om 🙂🙏
In my view
All of them are true but in different level of realities
Adavita is absolute
Dvait is what we experience now
Vishitha advait is the connection devotees feel while worshiping god
🙂🙏
Advaita Vedanta 🙏🙏🙏
🙂🙏
🙏🏼🔥🕉️🔥🙏🏼
🙂🙏
I am basically from an Adviata family. But I was wondering always how could there be Philosophies like Dhwata and Vishistadhwaita in presence of Adhwaita Philosophy. So I started reading the other Philosophies basically to refute them. It was really shocking to me that the Philosophy I believed earlier was very basic. Many people do not read the other acharyas Philosophy in detail and hence their understanding is very shallow.
Adhwaita is simple and very easy to understand. Srimad Ramanujacharya siddhanta is much more advanced compared to Sri Shankaracharyas Siddhanta and Srimad Madhwacharyas siddhanta is even more advanced than Srimad Ramanujacharyas and Dhwaita needs extreme processing abilities which is not possible for ordinary human beings .
It is not about how simple or advanced a philosophy is, it is simply about the 'Truth'. 'Truth' that is universal. 'Truth' that can be realized and experienced first-hand. 'Truth' that can be validated by science, and enlightened beings not just in India, but across the world. This 'Truth' is Advaita. From the Upanishads to Adi Shankaracharya, Ramana Maharshi, Vivekananda, Rumi, to Eckhart Tolle, all speak of the same Truth in different ways.
I think smartha too, Ultimately Shakti is supreme, with all gods gone, sages gone.
👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
🙂🙏
👍
🙂🙏
In one version you have a personal evolving Soul...in Advaita Vedanta, they don't stress the Soul. However, I prefer Sri Aurobindo's Integral Path, which includes the One and the Many. I know the Soul is real, I am Self Realized at the Soul level.
By soul, if you mean 'Atman', it's very real as per Advaita Vedanta
This distinction is spiritually amatuerish and dependant on level of evolution of seekers mind, imho
Even Swami Vivekananda described these philosophies as higher truths and lower truths.
If its argued that Adi Shankara teachings and Advita vedanta is illogical and then the same argument should also apply to Upanishad teachings considered to be most profound which has been accepted by even Western philosophers, world renowned Swami Vivekanada and Scientists.
🙂🙏
Advaith
?
Sri Ramana Maharishi and Sri Nisargadatta were self realised enlightened masters who got realisation while alive and explained the teachings of this self realisation. Through this way the world was able to understand self realisation or enlightenment which we call advaita vedanta. Before the entire world was created or manifested there was nothing or void . Hence Brahman too was void or formless. And this formless void created all forms. If you take the teachings of the Sikhs and their holy book the Guru granth and the opening stanza Ek Omkar which describes as without form and other attributes. The james web telescopes is sending us photos of trillions of galaxies trillions of light years away and scientists say that that the entire universe has no ending no boundaries and is ever expanding. Who created all this.
🙂🙏
Dwaita is the ultimate philosophy, requiring strong logical reasoning and intellect to fully comprehend. Many scholars transitioned from Advaita to Dwaita after realizing its profound truth.
Does advaita vedanta represent vedic atheism ?
No.
See the Samkhya school as it is closer to your question.
No , theism means believe in the truth ( Braham ) , atheist means believe in which things that cutout from knowing our true self , distracted from aatmagyan , do not continuous watching the thought .
Because Adi Sankara was born in Kerala, as per Keralite traditions , he says knowledge is moksha sadhana. After leaving this body, if Adi Sankara too has become Brahman, not all become one with Brahman but many are reborn in great number of birth-death cycles. This is not explained in Adaita.
I did not get your point.
Christian Gnostic checking in. And just like Kabir I'm the Lowest of the Low. See my blog, Spiderman Is Not Stan Lee.
I've just found Christian Gnostic teachings (sort of) in India via the Anurag Sagar...
Nonduality is exactly what Yaldabaoth would teach humanity. That 'he' is ALL. Not true according to the Christian Gnostics....
But it is true there are non dual Christian Gnostic sects (the Valentinian's)...
🙂🙏
Adi Sankara's era as 700 AD is wrong.
It's VISHISHTA DVAITA
Mate, it is disrespectful to show some drawings of four gurus and say you have respect for "these" you need to name them in that context.
19:20 so you cooked a nice sambhar and put two drops of urine by trying to justify Advaita because Tao and Sufism says same ? Really whom are you trying to impress ? You don't try to cook reasons to justify as this is not your Social Studies paper so you write points for marks. The comparison is out of place.
No jeevathma can become Paramasthma. Even Adi Shankara didn't become Vishnu/Paramaathma
Atman is Brahman.
Not Correct Dear. Please read more of Advaita and Vishista Advaita. Also please read shuddha adavaita and dwaita advaita.
Hi, what point in particular was not correct?
In the end it's only philosophy
Yes. It's only about 'Reality' and 'Self' and everything that exists.
Are you related to sai deepak?
Advaita is satya,
Vishista advaita says maya and brahman are inseparable, whereas you need maya to realize the true essence of brahman, brahman itself is nirguna there is a requirement of a jeeva or a wtiness who can experience brahman, and the best position to experience brahman is not with a human body but have thw body of narayana where he isnt reduced to 5 sence organs, there you can experience all concepts known to you and unknown to you.
And pl dont use that triangle eye thumbnail,
You know why
No I'm not related. Thank you 🙂🙏
Advait vedanta is the what and vishisht advaita for the how, gyan is hard bhakti is easy. Bcoz gyan is not just logical understanding but also aparokshanubhuti, i need to learn the knowledge from adi shankaracharya and i need to learn bhakti from ramanujacharya, ramanujacharya logic is flawed and adi shankaracharya bhakti is flawed
This is fact!!
The heading is undesirable. Hindus are already divided in every way and this has given way for weakening of the religion vis-a-vis onslaught by other religions. All isms should be taken as complementing ones for sanathana dharma to thrive without any problem.
Debates and arguments were a huge part of ancient Sanatana Dharma. We need to embrace this while understanding the oneness in these teachings.
@@adhvaithaThe three great acharyas were not contemporaries, but lived in different periods. Hence there was no scope for interaction among them and as such there was no scope for defending each others views though ultimately all views should converge to the same. Fortunately Swami Vivekananda took all the three philosophies as evolving ones from the perspective of an ordinary man who from being ignorant initially, can reach a level of a realised one ultimately, by having initial belief in dwaitha and finally a realised belief in advaitha by passing through the intermediate stage of vishishtadvaitha of Ramanuja.
@@sundaramsadagopan7795 Yes. I strongly resonate with Swami Vivekananda's framework.
Both are outdated spirituality. Without truthfulness both dont get anywhere with their blind faiths. Both talked of knowledge that doesnt conduce any enlightened state except ones own life. They wasted time for spiritual ego and that is their sins.
"The wise understand without judging. The ignorant judge without understanding."
@@adhvaitha then let the truth be hidden and suppressed. The definition of judging is unbiased then its righteousness and if its biased it is ignorance. The man who judges with bias is also in ignorance unlike the other. I dont see any divinity in philosophical display rather than being real and being in the said state . Both were arguing for established religions and their spiritual egos. Its caller spiritual ego. A blind man denies spiritual ego and is narcissistic. Advaita failed in many places because none of todays gurus are enlightened fully. It means left and right hemispheres equally developed and it can be verified by neuro science and devices. Man, i worked in para psychology level to other internal arts. I know who is enlightened or not by their fight for truth vs their lived out life for truth. The absolute truth is not shankara nor advaita .
Advaita doesnt deal with inner shadow but suppress and hid it so the left hemisphere doesnt grow nor correct its logical flaws delusions . They suffer from inner child wounds. Thus they may not have mana suddhi. A deluded man cant have mana suddhi. It then depends on who is deluding. Delusion means false beliefs. Adviata gave us half truth not full truth. Its an outdated culture nothing divine in it because it never made a man fully enlightened except half enlightenment, that is the right hemisphere or divine brain enlight. Its only a half step when the other hemisphere have torrents of logical flaws.
So a wise man corrects himself against truth and logic to be free from such flaws . The synthesis of both brain is full enlightenment. Advaita fails here and its followers as they hardly see within their own flaws. How can a blind man see within? He has to be truthful and unbiased so that benchmarking truthful honest can help him recorrect the faulty patterns or files.
A common man who memorised ad hominem attacks may snide on this because he believes in argument from authority not looking at facts and truths. His source is non verifiable scriptures and personalities . They failed to show one living example of enlightened person not even by sarva priyananda.
If he has inner light the syntheis of both hemispheres, lets verify with rain analysers and neuro cranial diodes. Lets take it serious rather than verbatims and argument. Let it face the test of fire. If it or they live up to their claims, just like zen monks, they must be transparent and willing to admit that they know only theories not the possessors of real inner states.
Why learning swimming theories when all you have to do is step in and practice? Is theory forever making anyone practical? Can a driver drive a car by learning books or by what?
The wise mam without bias must answer without total honesty!
I dont see religions or avatars or gods are real contemporary or uptodate. Even the consciousness even corrupt by evils. Perhaps you may be thinking of dunning kruger effect with a bit of over idealism. May I rest my case? Oh dear Lord!
Sanakra's doctrine is definitely wrong - it is inconsistent with Vaidika siddhanta and illogical as well - it can't resolve the inherent problem with the way it treats "maya" as a duality.
Madhavacarya, Ramanujacarya, Vallabhacarya and Sri Caitanya all disagree with Sankara.
I disagree. Upanishads strongly support Advaita Vedanta. [The acharyas you mentioned also disagree with each other.]
Maya dose not exist in atman which is brahman the undifferentiated consciousness.our mind(chitha) is a reflecting mirror in that self shining consciousness more like the sun and its reflection on different pots of water the impurities in the water are thoughts and emotions after purifying the waters it reflect the sun properly but it's still in duality. But what happens if we pour down the water the real sun alone exist before and after it's still alone existed untouched by all the chaos of mind matter and body likewise truth absolute alone exist.and that is the real you.He who understands with the help of his personal self mergers back into the impersonal self. He who understands
@@GpGp-u5ereal self or real atman is that consciousness which is inbulid(exist) in all beings. Is that brahama by adi shankaraachaary .
And maya is the illusion and this illusion is perceived through our 'illusory self' .
Because I have heard that maya root meaning is "from what we measure". Means that illusory self which only perceived maya (pain, hate, jealousy,.....)
Am I right about shankar's philosophy??
Self-enquiry steps suggest that if someone says something is wrong, before making such a statement, he or she should find out who says that and find who he is by following the steps given in Self-enquiry techniques. ( Please refer to world famous book "Who am I" ,available all over the world in almost all languages including most of the Indian languages)
@@adhvaitha not on this point of "mayavada". Everything is and belongs to Brahma. Maya is not separate and maya exists and is real, it simply must be understood ontologically. Considering Brahma's svarupa as illusiory, under the wrong imagined definition of the Mayavada doctrine is nonsensical.
While I appreciate a mostly unbiased representation of Vishishtadvaita Vedanta, I feel like Vishishtadvaita resonates deeply with people's natural intuitions.
Nobody would say that the drop of the water is the ocean or the spark is the same as a blazing inferno or the tree is the forest. It is naturally understood and intuitive that the tree, the spark and the drop are part of the whole, just like Jiva being part of the whole of the Brahman.
The mere fact that Advaita and Dvaita choose to cherry pick Shrutis that only aligns with their worldview while ignoring the other, is a defeater for both advaita and dvaita.
Only Vishishtadvaita does the job of reconciling non dual (abedha) shruthis with Bedha (dual) shrutis to form a complete philosophy. Without Vishishtadvaita, whole of vedanta would be a cherry picked mess contradicting other cherry picked mess. For this reason alone, Vishishtadvaita stands Supreme.
As for Vishishtadvaita being incompatible with Shaivism and Shaktaism, there are Shaiva/Shaakta variants of Vishishtadvaita too. In any case, Vishnu is the one who is called as Narayana in the Vedas. The Vedas proclaim Vishnu as the Supreme. So it's the Shaivas and Shaktas who are at odds with the Vedas.
Vishishtadvaita is actually way more universal and practical for all of humanity than advaita. The path of Bhakti and Sharanagathi is easier and universal to everyone than the path of gyana which is difficult to cultivate. That led to the orthodoxy and the worsening of caste system and exclusivity of Brahmins within Hinduism, while Vishishtadvaita opened gates for all into the fold of Hinduism.
Ultimately, advaita, like Buddhism, suffers from the epistemic problem. If you claim that anything but the Brahman is Mitya, then all the knowledge about Brahman from scriptures like Vedas and Upanishads are also not real. And there remains no basis for any claim an Advaitin could make. Unlike Vishishtadvaita which has epistemic certainty.
Thank you. Here is my response.
1. Just because now we feel as limited beings, this does not mean this is the absolute truth. Going from finite to infinite is 'Enlightenment'.
2. Advaita doesn't cherry-pick Shrutis. It explains all Shrutis.
3. Vedas mention many things, they use many names. Upanishads talk about the ultimate reality/principle called 'Brahman'. Even Brahmasutras, they strongly support Advaita Vedanta.
4. Devotion and surrender is a part of Advaita Vedanta also.
5. There is no epistemic problem. Only Brahman is, as per Advaita Vedanta. Yes all scriptures are also simply pointers to Brahman, they do not have the same ontological status as Brahman.
@@adhvaitha @adhvaitha
1. But how does the finite become the infinite ? It become part of the infinite but the part is never the whole.
2. Does Advaita and Dvaita also incorporate bedha and Abedha shruthis respectively ? I don't believe so. Which is one of the reasons Vishishtadvaita came about. To take all three types of Shrutis and combine them into one body of work. Hence its called the Ghataka philosophy that reconciles all seemingly irreconcilable parts of Shrutis.
3. There are Vishishtadvaita variants considering Shiva as the Supreme too. So that point shall be discarded. I have looked into verses which proclaim Vishnu as Supreme. But ultimately I don't know the Vedas in entirety. So I don't wish to contest that point.
4. Can someone attain moksha through Bhakti and sharanagathi even if they don't have gyana of the Brahman, as per advaita ? I'm sure Brahmasutras support advaita vedanta but it also adds so many qualifiers, at which point it becomes Vishishtadvaita.
5. How can we know that they are pointing towards the Brahman when they are themselves illusory?