Ignorance is like a 'partition' in computer science. You can take 1 harddrive (with all the knowlege on it) and partition it into segments, such that each segment has no access to the whole. Thus, ignorance is a power of Brahman, which it uses to create smaller expierences than it's complete self, as the whole. Why? Boredom, exploration, love. Within infinity is all possible knowledge, and partitions of that knowledge.
This is not an explanation or even a functional analogy. All it does is say ignorance is somehow a positive capability without explaining in what way. Can Brahman will itself into non-existence?
@@nanashi7779 Brahman IS existence, by definition. Non-existence is anti- to Brahman, sort of like anti-matter to matter. Also, Brahman, by definition of advaita vedanta is singular (non-dual), so it cannot be assumed to have a dual state of existence AND non-existence. Besides, who says Brahman has "will"? So what you posit is not a reasonable scenario, you are just putting up an anti- prefix to all that is Brahman (Sat-Chit-Ananda), and asking Brahman to will itself to be Asat, Achit and Nananda. This is just a non-question, similar to asking whether you can be non-you. Can you be non-you?
Swamiji is gangsta. His way of explaining the existing body of spiritual knowledge that is so comprehensive and concise, whilst correlating it with the most cutting edge advancements in science is something to be revered 🙏
The moment he said he openly admits he's not enlightened he earned massive respect. It's like we can learn together now and this spiritual friend of mine has a lot of prajna to offer.
All the possible attempts of addressing the cause of IGNORANCE will only lead to PARADOX! SILENCE is the only EFFECTIVE answer for the fundamental question of Ignorance!? In SILENCE ignorance melts away....
It's actually less mysterious than that. Infinity can't-not create everything. There is no choice in the matter. By definition, infinity contains all finite things. It just so happens the only way for the One Brahman to create anything, is by limitation (maya). Because anything that is unlimited -- is merely Brahman again. And no new creation has been achieved. This is why Maya (limitation) must exist.
🙏🙏🙏 Pranam Maharaj Jai Shree Ramakrishna " Avidyaayaa: Avidyaathvam Idham-eva thu lakshanam Yath Pramaana-asahishnuthvam Anyathaa Vasthu Saa Bhaveth " -- [ Brihadaranyakavarthika , 181 ] The definition of Avidya or ' Ignorance'(not-knowing) is that 'its ever not knowable '... itself. It can never be known or defined through any ' means of knowledge ' (pramana).... Or else , it would be Real (Vasthu).
The problem of existential or fundemental ignorance is a very important matter for every spiritual tradition. According to great teachers of humankind to live in ignorance means living in a "dark cave of the bondage" (Plato), under the tyrany of sins and death (Jesus), in the vicious circle of suffering (Gautam Buddha). According especially existentialist philosophers the living in ignorance means to live in forgetfulness about your mortality and the absence of any meaning of life. As a summary the ignorance means to live in the condition of selfdeception and slavery.
Ajata - no creation - is one of the highest levels of knowledge in Advaita Vedanta . Sri Ramana said that all these queries are resolved in the direct experience of Self Realization. 🙏🕉️
The best answer is in Gaurapadas dream theory...that sleep n dream....the awaken state is also dream state,now the ignorance of the person in the dream don't matter anything to the person who is awakened....
"Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns-the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tends to be the difficult ones." - Donald Rumsfeld.
From consciousness arises name and form and from name and form arises consciousness and with the cessation of consciousness is the cessation of name and form and vise versa.
Ignorance is a perception that comes from identifying the body as the self (I am this body) Because we are aware of the body we identify with it as being our actual beingness, but the body Isn't that which identifies thus it is not our actual "being" or existence. So, we can say ignorance is not understanding the difference between the spiritual and material, as Krishna says in the Gita: "those who are seers of the truth have concluded that of the nonexistent (body) there is no endurance and of the eternal (self) there is no change this they have concluded by studying the nature of both."
- Omniscient - “all-knowing” - Is anyone in this world omniscient, knowing everything? - If there is something that someone does not know then that person is ignorant of that piece of information. - If a person is ignorant of even one piece of information then they are ignorant to some degree. There are different degrees of ignorance - If no person in this world is omniscient then every person in this world is ignorant to some degree - Either the mind of a being is omniscient, knowing everything, or that mind is ignorant to some degree - Ignorance seems to be the default state of all of us. (In this world)
Dear Swani, enlightened beings don't need to search for source of their ignorance because they become the whole. Remembering Self is source of this magic.
These answers are nothing less than Bhasyas and Upanishads catering to the modern inquirer who is nothing less in the history of Advaita inquiry. Several statements made by Swamiji hit something inside directly. Here is my understanding to this question. Ignorance is not a “thing”. For e.g. A woman becomes a mother only in relation to a child. Brahman becomes “Ignorance” only in relation to an Ignorant person. A deeper inquiry will reveal there is no “thing” or no “body” called a person. Similar to, "if there is no child, there is no mother"- Where "there is no ignorant person, there is no ignorance". Maha Maya is nothing but Brahman itself. She is not in Brahman. She is Brahman. She is an activity of Brahman.
Well said. It's almost like an orange and an orange tree. We are the orange calling the tree a fool for creating us bc we are smaller and more limited than than the tree. When wholistically- all that has occured is the creation of a beautiful orange. Perfect, as it itself. 'Ignorance" only enters the equations from a very small narrow starting position.
@@yogeshdesai5999 when Brahman needs nothing, where is the question of purpose? What is the purpose of a dream? What is the purpose of a ripple in a river.
@@meeraesq Have you ever done anything without purpose? (Because you are also Brahman. Right?) What is the purpose of this creation? If everything is Brahman & it needs nothing then. That too this material creation is full of miseries (Dukkhalayam) & it's impermanent (Ashashwatam) as per Vedic Scriptures.
In Catholicism St Augustine taught that darkness has no existence in itself, dark is due to lack of light. Similarly attachment to material passions is due to lack of participation in the uncreated grace said St Gregory of Palamas. St Maximos the Confessor taught that freedom to enter attachment is part of divine providence given to each eternal logia or ideas. So when an eternal logia breathe by God into Adam's nostrils it brings him into life. The analogy would be Logos/Nous is Brahman, and we're all His ideas. Attachment comes when we exercise our freewill driven by material passions. If possible please do video discussing sub-schools within Advaita Vedanta. It seems to me that Vivarana sounds similar to Open Theism in Christianity while Bhamati looks similar to Catholic/Eastern Orthodox view on locus of passion. In Christianity instead of ignorance we associate attachment with false desire or material passion. Hopefully one day there will be more dialogue between Christianity and Hinduism. Very interesting topic.
মহারাজ একটা concept আছে called Russell's paradox. ভাঙতে ভাঙতে এমন একটা অবস্থা আসে যার পরে আর কিছুই থাকে না। I do not know if this leads to the knowledge that matter is energy condensed and energy is matter in motion. আপনাকে সশ্রদ্ধ প্রণাম নিবেদন করি🌹🌹। You are source of endless unblemished joy, নিষ্কলুষ আনন্দ🥀🥀🥀🌼🌼🌼🌸
Ignorance start with attachment. Real self going behind pleasure/sensations generated by brain. Sensations are a function of genes and knowledge. Not the real self. One has to understand this. You can end the ignorance.
I am a Westerner, and one in which Christianity just doesn't make sense. I have been most attracted to Zen and the Tao, but have recently in the past few years read the Upanishads and the Bhagavad Gita. I grasp the concept of nondualism, and Brahman. I am struggling with the very topic of this video, and am about to watch. I am open to other suggestions as I walk my path. Sometimes all these beliefs system get so dogmatic, verbose, and even circular, that Zen always seems like a nice safe home - the comfort with uncertainty and not knowing. Anyway, here goes.
The more suitable understanding would be that Brahman is dreaming and thus in its dream it sees the world. Also if BRAHMAN is "Nirahankara" meaning ego-less then what is the necessity for it to have a "power" which will obscure itself from the world?
The title asks “where does ignorance come from? ” . Ignorance is not a thing which came from somewhere. It is not something that is tangible or positive. It is term which denotes the absence of knowledge. Such questions arise only in the state of ignorance. Once ignorance gets destroyed by the dawn of knowledge, the very question about the source of ignorance will vanish. Therefore, men blessed with discrimination must try to destroy ignorance by doing spiritual practices rather than trying to find out the source of ignorance.
Ultimately isn't the ignorance contained in the fact that you can know you are from the source but cannot prove it with means at your disposal? It seems to me that since we can only prove this circumstantially and the limited being implies a limited knowledge locates ignorance in us.
Delicious lecture ❤ However: the chicken and the egg “paradox” is not a singular reasoning issue but a lack of information revealed/asked in the question.
As the waves in the sea constantly hit the sand, 1000 people watch and describe it in different ways. For some, they never even acknowledge it. For some, it's mythical. For a fisherman, it indicates his daily catch. For a kid, it's beautiful. For a scientist, it's math. For some, it's nature's force; others say it's God's power. But still, it's waves and its results. It's Brahman and its result the maya. The positive and negative charge, like the day and night, good and bad. Without it, the fullness never happens. It's like two halves make a circle, the fullness. Only a yogi can go beyond this circle, aka waves of the sea, and say it's maya or not real. For the rest, it's life, just different views like the waves.
@@vijayanag6860 forgetting and remembering is for who if it is for the person remembering is only a thought. "You are not a person" is also a thought. Anything said here is a thought . Realization that thought belongs to nobody may be closest to enlightenment
18:35 Lord Shiva coming in our dreams cannot be considered as unreal/maya or part of a dream. He is the paramaatma, the ultimate reality and absolute consciousness. If he visits then it's not considered maya. Its a reality because he is not binded by maya like us sentient beings. He is the brahman who CREATED maya. P.S whether u call this brahman krishna/shiva/maa durga it's one and the same. No difference एकम सत विप्रा बहुधा वदन्ति
@@riteshsenpai6572 Adi Shakaracharya of Advaita Vedanta considered him as Paramaatma as Parameshwara and didn't have any problem worshipping him, writing so many hymns for him and taking his NAME. He was a great devotee.
@@riteshsenpai6572 He's not just SOMEONE. The video you're replying on currently is of Swami Sarvapriyananda who is a Vedantic Monk and whose Guru is the Indian Philosopher and teacher of Advaita Vedanta- Adi Shakaracharya 🙏🏻 who founded the concept of non dualism. So if that SOMEONE is worshipping Lord Shiva or Lord Krishna then I think they know what they are doing. So let's pay our respects to these wise gurus and try to follow their words and their paths 🙏🏻
@@thekindmystic I really respect them. And it's their path. I do not have any problem with them but your statement. So I was just correcting you. Lord Shiva , Lord Krishna are Deities. They have their work to do. They are like workers in the kingdom of Paramatma. 🙏
I was thinking about this question. I believe ignorance is just a journey to enlightenment. One knowledgeable step at a time that keeps removing it. The journey only exists when there’s a destination. The destination is the reality that makes the journey relevant. The self-realization of Brahman is the destination and the only reality and ignorance only comes into picture when there’s no self realization yet. Hence, ignorance can’t be a separate reality.
That's correct.... As Advaita always claims that it will give you what was already there and will take what was not there... In reality there is no ignorance... no ignorant... But only knowledge... Upon realisation you will find out that this ignorance... you ... this world...and a that there is a truth apart from you and your journey to that truth... all these reasonings, philosophies, science, world everything known and unknown is not but you yourself all the way... you were trying to find out yourself and all that you were seeing is you yourself and nothing else...🙏🙏
the talk is very nice. however this may be overthinking much simpler concepts . most verses in upanishads may have much simpler and straightforward answers. "ignorance is a potential side effect of any perception " may be a simpler , concise way to represent this idea . why pull Brahman into this whole discussion ?
Why is the role of Shakti not brought in to explain ‘ignorance’ ? Without Mahamaya there can never be a convincing answer to this question! Sri Ramakrishna never shied away from describing the role of Mahamaya in creating this illusion. Why should we hold ourselves back when we are of that lineage? Adi Shankarcharya too had to accept Shakti. And here we are going around in circles trying to answer such a difficult question with an logic that is JUST NOT CONVINCING.
Logic is convincing but you are not capable of understanding those logic. Avidya is part of Maya not mahamaya herself. Logic discussion are not dealt by stories. Swami Sarva priyananda is not kathavachak to explain answers in stories. When you are enlightened even the god and goddess are mithya too you.
11:39 - but Swamiji, considering German, or for that matter, any language to be born out of idea, having no existential significance. Isn't learning the language, then, is actually covering oneself with a veil of ignorance? Making "efforts" to learn a system of knowledge with its roots in ideation that exploits or uses the reasoning capabilities of human brain?
@AB-yp7nc this gets complicated In a hurry .. I can bring in previous births and names ... but then you can question ..to whom the names belongs... and to me they were names that appeared and disappeared ...none of them belonged/belongs/will ever belong to me
Then try this.... Just be understood that ignorance is just an appearance. It's not real as you are unreal and it seems to be real as you feel you are real...🙏
@@sreekanthp8839 You think I have not heard this before? You are giving circular reasoning. Are you saying that the vyavaharika reality does not exist? It may not be the ultimate reality but it does exist. Maya does exist. Why? If it is due to ignorance then ignorance comes before Maya came into existence. If you say that both Maya and Brahman have been existing for ever, then i'm sorry i would say it does not make sense.
@@vs9324 No dear... I am not saying that... I am just saying that the ignorance and the ignorant are not two seperate things .. ignorance is you yourself as this chithabhasa.. See what Swami is telling that, you are having ignorance only when you are ignorant of the reality that the ignorance is not there... What you are searching for ... in this case ignorance is not even there at the first place and if the cause itself is unreal... then the effect will also become unreal and the whole circular paradox of cause and effect itself is unreal... See... I am not telling that vyavaharika does not exist... But it's not what you think it is... It's not as you perceive it... rather it's the reality itself... Just like rope and snake... In ignorance you see the snake and when someone tells you that it's not a snake, but a rope and you are ignorant of the rope and you ask him this same question of ignorance of rope... What will be the answer... Just think about it... Just keep this example in mind and think about it... Don't hurry to reply back... Think thoroughly and reply....🙏🙏
@@vs9324I can't claim to have fully imbibed this, so this is a comment for both of us: ignorance 'creates' Jiva, in the sense that it is a simultaneous co existence; if one ceases to exist, the other disappears (from the nasadiya sukta: then, neither death existed, nor immortality. Death has to exist for immortality, just as heat has to exist for cold, or good has to exist for bad). Also, trying to work on logic from Paramatmika level is meaningless, simply because logic can operate only in duality, while Paramatmika state is beyond even experiential. Does this work? I am not sure if it works for me! 😂
@@vs9324Also, considering time to be within the realm of experiencer, trying to reason it out while holding time space causation as real would not work out (guess I am restating the same stuff I told before?!). However, from intellectual point of view, Adwaita doesn't hold world as unreal, but rather unclassifiable as either real or unreal, because it is real in the sense that we do experience it, but unreal in the sense that it is ever changing, and dream like if you look at either the past or future (you could only ascertain the present moment as real, and past and future only in terms of cause-effect). For the enlightened, "God alone is, and everything is not" (paraphrasing swamiji paraphrasing Swami Vivekananda)
At first see who are you. The answer is Atman/Brahman. Realise yourself as the Self. Then see does the Self have ignorance about itself? The answer is no. Then why you bother asking the question? Also, Brahman has taken form of the mind. The purpose of the mind is to be ignorant ar first then do spiritual sadhana then to become enlightened. Therefore, don't worry with the question.
Absurd answer. Ashrayanupapatti: What is the locus or support of Maya? Where does Avidya reside? If there is any such thing as Maya or Avidya, we are justified in asking for its seat or abode. Verily it cannot exist in Brahman, for then the nondualism of Brahman would break down. Moreover, Brahman is said to be pure self luminous consciousness or knowledge and Avidya means ignorance. Then how can ignorance exist in knowledge? Again, Avidya cannot reside in the indvidual self, for the individuality of the self is said to be the creation of Avidya. How can the cause depend on its effect? Hence Avidya cannot exist either in Brahman or in Jiva. It is an illusory concept, a figment of the Advaitin's imagination. If it resides anywhere, it resides only in the mind of the Advaitin who has imagined this wonderful pseufo-concept, this logical myth TirodhAnanupapatti: How can Avidya conceal Brahman? If it does, then Brahman is not self-conscious and self-luminous subject. If Brahman is of the nature of self-luminosity and self-proved pure knowledge, Ignorance cannot cover or veil its essence. It is as absurd as to say that darkness can hide light or that night can act as a veil on day. Svarupanupapatti: What is the nature of Avidya? Is it positive(real) or negative or both or neither? If it is positive then how can it be Avidya? Avidya means ignorance and ignorance means absence of knowledge. To regard Ignorance as positive is to accept self-contradiction. Moreover if Ignorance is positive, how can it be ever destroyed? No positive entity can be destroyed. As the Advaitin admits that ignorance is removed by Knowledge, Ignorance can never be positive. And if Avidya is negative , then how can it project this world illusion on Brahman? To Say that Avidya is both positive and negative is to embrace self-contradiction. And to say that it is neither positive nor negative is to give up all logic.
Ignorance is like a 'partition' in computer science. You can take 1 harddrive (with all the knowlege on it) and partition it into segments, such that each segment has no access to the whole. Thus, ignorance is a power of Brahman, which it uses to create smaller expierences than it's complete self, as the whole. Why? Boredom, exploration, love. Within infinity is all possible knowledge, and partitions of that knowledge.
Good Analogy !
Ur analogy makes sense 😊
Awesome analogy
This is not an explanation or even a functional analogy. All it does is say ignorance is somehow a positive capability without explaining in what way. Can Brahman will itself into non-existence?
@@nanashi7779 Brahman IS existence, by definition. Non-existence is anti- to Brahman, sort of like anti-matter to matter. Also, Brahman, by definition of advaita vedanta is singular (non-dual), so it cannot be assumed to have a dual state of existence AND non-existence.
Besides, who says Brahman has "will"? So what you posit is not a reasonable scenario, you are just putting up an anti- prefix to all that is Brahman (Sat-Chit-Ananda), and asking Brahman to will itself to be Asat, Achit and Nananda. This is just a non-question, similar to asking whether you can be non-you. Can you be non-you?
Swamiji is gangsta. His way of explaining the existing body of spiritual knowledge that is so comprehensive and concise, whilst correlating it with the most cutting edge advancements in science is something to be revered 🙏
The moment he said he openly admits he's not enlightened he earned massive respect. It's like we can learn together now and this spiritual friend of mine has a lot of prajna to offer.
Sarvapriyananda is a well of wisdom and knowledge
What a thought provoking lecture! Thoroughly enjoyed 🙏
Charan Sparsh, Gurudev. Thanks a lot for the most helpful video.
॥जय श्रीरामकृष्ण||
🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
Namaskar Swami Sarvapriyanandaji Maharaj 🙏🏻
oo Swamy ji thank you whatever you shared
Great and exhaustive exscursus about the problem of ignorance. The first answer is the best.
All the possible attempts of addressing the cause of IGNORANCE will only lead to PARADOX!
SILENCE is the only EFFECTIVE answer for the fundamental question of Ignorance!?
In SILENCE ignorance melts away....
True. The correct reply to all paradoxes is not more explanation but silence.
It's actually less mysterious than that. Infinity can't-not create everything. There is no choice in the matter. By definition, infinity contains all finite things. It just so happens the only way for the One Brahman to create anything, is by limitation (maya). Because anything that is unlimited -- is merely Brahman again. And no new creation has been achieved. This is why Maya (limitation) must exist.
Enlightened beings have no questions whatsoever. So in same sense, we can say that every question is wrong.
Thank you 🙏💙🙏🕉️🪽
🙏🙏🙏
Pranam Maharaj
Jai Shree Ramakrishna
" Avidyaayaa: Avidyaathvam Idham-eva thu lakshanam
Yath Pramaana-asahishnuthvam Anyathaa Vasthu Saa Bhaveth "
-- [ Brihadaranyakavarthika , 181 ]
The definition of Avidya or ' Ignorance'(not-knowing) is that 'its ever not knowable '... itself. It can never be known or defined through any ' means of knowledge ' (pramana).... Or else , it would be Real (Vasthu).
Thank you! Swamiji 🧡
Pranam Guruji 🙏
The problem of existential or fundemental ignorance is a very important matter for every spiritual tradition. According to great teachers of humankind to live in ignorance means living in a "dark cave of the bondage" (Plato), under the tyrany of sins and death (Jesus), in the vicious circle of suffering (Gautam Buddha). According especially existentialist philosophers the living in ignorance means to live in forgetfulness about your mortality and the absence of any meaning of life. As a summary the ignorance means to live in the condition of selfdeception and slavery.
Pranam Swami Jee 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
Pranam swamiji
Pranams...., 👏👏👏💐💕💖🕉️
Namaskar Swamiji 🙏❤️🙏
जय हो श्री स्वामी विवेकानन्द, जय हो श्री सच्चिदानन्द, जय श्री रामकृष्ण परमहंस नमोस्तुते।🙏🏼
Ajata - no creation - is one of the highest levels of knowledge in Advaita Vedanta . Sri Ramana said that all these queries are resolved in the direct experience of Self Realization. 🙏🕉️
🕉️THANK YOU ☸️
😍🌹🧡💖🤗💝
The best answer is in Gaurapadas dream theory...that sleep n dream....the awaken state is also dream state,now the ignorance of the person in the dream don't matter anything to the person who is awakened....
"Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns-the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tends to be the difficult ones." - Donald Rumsfeld.
Swami is such a brilliant speaker, my goodness. Has Swami heard Shantena Sabbadini speak about Laozi and non-locality?
From consciousness arises name and form and from name and form arises consciousness and with the cessation of consciousness is the cessation of name and form and vise versa.
Name and form does not give rise to consciousness.
@@ChiranthN-tn8shyes!
Ignorance is a perception that comes from identifying the body as the self (I am this body) Because we are aware of the body we identify with it as being our actual beingness, but the body Isn't that which identifies thus it is not our actual "being" or existence. So, we can say ignorance is not understanding the difference between the spiritual and material, as Krishna says in the Gita: "those who are seers of the truth have concluded that of the nonexistent (body) there is no endurance and of the eternal (self) there is no change this they have concluded by studying the nature of both."
- Omniscient - “all-knowing”
- Is anyone in this world omniscient, knowing everything?
- If there is something that someone does not know then that person is ignorant of that piece of information.
- If a person is ignorant of even one piece of information then they are ignorant to some degree. There are different degrees of ignorance
- If no person in this world is omniscient then every person in this world is ignorant to some degree
- Either the mind of a being is omniscient, knowing everything, or that mind is ignorant to some degree
- Ignorance seems to be the default state of all of us. (In this world)
Dear Swani, enlightened beings don't need to search for source of their ignorance because they become the whole. Remembering Self is source of this magic.
These answers are nothing less than Bhasyas and Upanishads catering to the modern inquirer who is nothing less in the history of Advaita inquiry. Several statements made by Swamiji hit something inside directly. Here is my understanding to this question. Ignorance is not a “thing”. For e.g. A woman becomes a mother only in relation to a child. Brahman becomes “Ignorance” only in relation to an Ignorant person. A deeper inquiry will reveal there is no “thing” or no “body” called a person. Similar to, "if there is no child, there is no mother"- Where "there is no ignorant person, there is no ignorance". Maha Maya is nothing but Brahman itself. She is not in Brahman. She is Brahman. She is an activity of Brahman.
Well said. It's almost like an orange and an orange tree. We are the orange calling the tree a fool for creating us bc we are smaller and more limited than than the tree. When wholistically- all that has occured is the creation of a beautiful orange. Perfect, as it itself. 'Ignorance" only enters the equations from a very small narrow starting position.
If everything is Brahman then what is the purpose of this creation?
@@yogeshdesai5999 when Brahman needs nothing, where is the question of purpose? What is the purpose of a dream? What is the purpose of a ripple in a river.
@@meeraesq Have you ever done anything without purpose? (Because you are also Brahman. Right?) What is the purpose of this creation? If everything is Brahman & it needs nothing then. That too this material creation is full of miseries (Dukkhalayam) & it's impermanent (Ashashwatam) as per Vedic Scriptures.
@@meeraesq this material creation is a serious work. How can you compare it with dream? And ripple in river has a purpose.
🙏🙏🙏
In Catholicism St Augustine taught that darkness has no existence in itself, dark is due to lack of light. Similarly attachment to material passions is due to lack of participation in the uncreated grace said St Gregory of Palamas. St Maximos the Confessor taught that freedom to enter attachment is part of divine providence given to each eternal logia or ideas. So when an eternal logia breathe by God into Adam's nostrils it brings him into life. The analogy would be Logos/Nous is Brahman, and we're all His ideas. Attachment comes when we exercise our freewill driven by material passions. If possible please do video discussing sub-schools within Advaita Vedanta. It seems to me that Vivarana sounds similar to Open Theism in Christianity while Bhamati looks similar to Catholic/Eastern Orthodox view on locus of passion. In Christianity instead of ignorance we associate attachment with false desire or material passion. Hopefully one day there will be more dialogue between Christianity and Hinduism. Very interesting topic.
মহারাজ একটা concept আছে called Russell's paradox. ভাঙতে ভাঙতে এমন একটা অবস্থা আসে যার পরে আর কিছুই থাকে না। I do not know if this leads to the knowledge that matter is energy condensed and energy is matter in motion.
আপনাকে সশ্রদ্ধ প্রণাম নিবেদন করি🌹🌹। You are source of endless unblemished joy, নিষ্কলুষ আনন্দ🥀🥀🥀🌼🌼🌼🌸
R
A
M
A
K
R
I
S
H
N
A
Sarvapriyananda Puri..
.
*
💜
Metaphors by writing your names..
.
Ignorance start with attachment. Real self going behind pleasure/sensations generated by brain. Sensations are a function of genes and knowledge. Not the real self. One has to understand this. You can end the ignorance.
A
Gain..
.
*
💜
.
I am a Westerner, and one in which Christianity just doesn't make sense. I have been most attracted to Zen and the Tao, but have recently in the past few years read the Upanishads and the Bhagavad Gita. I grasp the concept of nondualism, and Brahman. I am struggling with the very topic of this video, and am about to watch. I am open to other suggestions as I walk my path. Sometimes all these beliefs system get so dogmatic, verbose, and even circular, that Zen always seems like a nice safe home - the comfort with uncertainty and not knowing. Anyway, here goes.
Do you really need a safe home in intellectual matters?
@@sumondutta1101 So you think all this is just intellectual? Are you saying it is not real? If it is not real, then no need to worry?
The more suitable understanding would be that Brahman is dreaming and thus in its dream it sees the world. Also if BRAHMAN is "Nirahankara" meaning ego-less then what is the necessity for it to have a "power" which will obscure itself from the world?
Direct Answer= Ignorance is not Real. 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
The title asks “where does ignorance come from? ” . Ignorance is not a thing which came from somewhere. It is not something that is tangible or positive. It is term which denotes the absence of knowledge. Such questions arise only in the state of ignorance. Once ignorance gets destroyed by the dawn of knowledge, the very question about the source of ignorance will vanish. Therefore, men blessed with discrimination must try to destroy ignorance by doing spiritual practices rather than trying to find out the source of ignorance.
Ultimately isn't the ignorance contained in the fact that you can know you are from the source but cannot prove it with means at your disposal? It seems to me that since we can only prove this circumstantially and the limited being implies a limited knowledge locates ignorance in us.
Swamiji, what is then a dreamless, or the Pasayanti stage.
Delicious lecture ❤
However: the chicken and the egg “paradox” is not a singular reasoning issue but a lack of information revealed/asked in the question.
As the waves in the sea constantly hit the sand, 1000 people watch and describe it in different ways. For some, they never even acknowledge it. For some, it's mythical. For a fisherman, it indicates his daily catch. For a kid, it's beautiful. For a scientist, it's math. For some, it's nature's force; others say it's God's power.
But still, it's waves and its results. It's Brahman and its result the maya. The positive and negative charge, like the day and night, good and bad. Without it, the fullness never happens. It's like two halves make a circle, the fullness. Only a yogi can go beyond this circle, aka waves of the sea, and say it's maya or not real. For the rest, it's life, just different views like the waves.
Pranams Maharaj.. is ignorance forgetfulness ? I forget I'm wearing the spectacles and find it on my nose..? Vismarana ?
@@vijayanag6860 forgetting and remembering is for who if it is for the person remembering is only a thought. "You are not a person" is also a thought. Anything said here is a thought . Realization that thought belongs to nobody may be closest to enlightenment
How can darkness be in the light?
When you are blinded by the sun
18:35 Lord Shiva coming in our dreams cannot be considered as unreal/maya or part of a dream. He is the paramaatma, the ultimate reality and absolute consciousness. If he visits then it's not considered maya. Its a reality because he is not binded by maya like us sentient beings. He is the brahman who CREATED maya.
P.S whether u call this brahman krishna/shiva/maa durga it's one and the same. No difference
एकम सत विप्रा बहुधा वदन्ति
Lord Shiva is not paramatma. The paramatma doesn't even have any name and description.
@@riteshsenpai6572 Adi Shakaracharya of Advaita Vedanta considered him as Paramaatma as Parameshwara and didn't have any problem worshipping him, writing so many hymns for him and taking his NAME. He was a great devotee.
@@thekindmystic No problem in worshiping him. But Just because someone considered him as a paramatma doesn't make it a fact.
@@riteshsenpai6572 He's not just SOMEONE. The video you're replying on currently is of Swami Sarvapriyananda who is a Vedantic Monk and whose Guru is the Indian Philosopher and teacher of Advaita Vedanta- Adi Shakaracharya 🙏🏻 who founded the concept of non dualism.
So if that SOMEONE is worshipping Lord Shiva or Lord Krishna then I think they know what they are doing. So let's pay our respects to these wise gurus and try to follow their words and their paths 🙏🏻
@@thekindmystic I really respect them. And it's their path. I do not have any problem with them but your statement. So I was just correcting you. Lord Shiva , Lord Krishna are Deities. They have their work to do. They are like workers in the kingdom of Paramatma. 🙏
I was thinking about this question. I believe ignorance is just a journey to enlightenment. One knowledgeable step at a time that keeps removing it. The journey only exists when there’s a destination. The destination is the reality that makes the journey relevant. The self-realization of Brahman is the destination and the only reality and ignorance only comes into picture when there’s no self realization yet. Hence, ignorance can’t be a separate reality.
That's correct.... As Advaita always claims that it will give you what was already there and will take what was not there... In reality there is no ignorance... no ignorant... But only knowledge... Upon realisation you will find out that this ignorance... you ... this world...and a that there is a truth apart from you and your journey to that truth... all these reasonings, philosophies, science, world everything known and unknown is not but you yourself all the way... you were trying to find out yourself and all that you were seeing is you yourself and nothing else...🙏🙏
Brahman is not a destination. Who is ignorant?
@@jaydescribe you are correct. I only meant it as a figurative example.
@@suprabh2108 🙏🏾
the talk is very nice. however this may be overthinking much simpler concepts . most verses in upanishads may have much simpler and straightforward answers.
"ignorance is a potential side effect of any perception "
may be a simpler , concise way to represent this idea .
why pull Brahman into this whole discussion ?
so Ignorance is like a mental block(?)
Isn't lack of knowledge about Brahman "ignorance"
Why is the role of Shakti not brought in to explain ‘ignorance’ ? Without Mahamaya there can never be a convincing answer to this question! Sri Ramakrishna never shied away from describing the role of Mahamaya in creating this illusion. Why should we hold ourselves back when we are of that lineage? Adi Shankarcharya too had to accept Shakti. And here we are going around in circles trying to answer such a difficult question with an logic that is JUST NOT CONVINCING.
Swami ji answering as per adwaita.
It would be nice to hear the answer of Swami Medhananda on this issue.
Logic is convincing but you are not capable of understanding those logic. Avidya is part of Maya not mahamaya herself. Logic discussion are not dealt by stories. Swami Sarva priyananda is not kathavachak to explain answers in stories. When you are enlightened even the god and goddess are mithya too you.
And your whole comment is without proper reasoning. And I doubt that you know advait or not.
11:39 - but Swamiji, considering German, or for that matter, any language to be born out of idea, having no existential significance.
Isn't learning the language, then, is actually covering oneself with a veil of ignorance? Making "efforts" to learn a system of knowledge with its roots in ideation that exploits or uses the reasoning capabilities of human brain?
Simply playing hide and seek with itself.
Ignorance can have a start .. say I have alzheimers and forget my name.. we could say it has a start
@AB-yp7nc this gets complicated In a hurry .. I can bring in previous births and names ... but then you can question ..to whom the names belongs... and to me they were names that appeared and disappeared ...none of them belonged/belongs/will ever belong to me
I'm not convinced withe answers. All the stated answers viz ignorance is in Jiv atma, in Paramatma or that it does not matter, are unconvincing.
Then try this.... Just be understood that ignorance is just an appearance. It's not real as you are unreal and it seems to be real as you feel you are real...🙏
@@sreekanthp8839 You think I have not heard this before? You are giving circular reasoning. Are you saying that the vyavaharika reality does not exist? It may not be the ultimate reality but it does exist. Maya does exist. Why? If it is due to ignorance then ignorance comes before Maya came into existence. If you say that both Maya and Brahman have been existing for ever, then i'm sorry i would say it does not make sense.
@@vs9324 No dear... I am not saying that... I am just saying that the ignorance and the ignorant are not two seperate things .. ignorance is you yourself as this chithabhasa.. See what Swami is telling that, you are having ignorance only when you are ignorant of the reality that the ignorance is not there... What you are searching for ... in this case ignorance is not even there at the first place and if the cause itself is unreal... then the effect will also become unreal and the whole circular paradox of cause and effect itself is unreal...
See... I am not telling that vyavaharika does not exist... But it's not what you think it is... It's not as you perceive it... rather it's the reality itself... Just like rope and snake... In ignorance you see the snake and when someone tells you that it's not a snake, but a rope and you are ignorant of the rope and you ask him this same question of ignorance of rope... What will be the answer... Just think about it...
Just keep this example in mind and think about it... Don't hurry to reply back... Think thoroughly and reply....🙏🙏
@@vs9324I can't claim to have fully imbibed this, so this is a comment for both of us: ignorance 'creates' Jiva, in the sense that it is a simultaneous co existence; if one ceases to exist, the other disappears (from the nasadiya sukta: then, neither death existed, nor immortality. Death has to exist for immortality, just as heat has to exist for cold, or good has to exist for bad).
Also, trying to work on logic from Paramatmika level is meaningless, simply because logic can operate only in duality, while Paramatmika state is beyond even experiential. Does this work? I am not sure if it works for me! 😂
@@vs9324Also, considering time to be within the realm of experiencer, trying to reason it out while holding time space causation as real would not work out (guess I am restating the same stuff I told before?!). However, from intellectual point of view, Adwaita doesn't hold world as unreal, but rather unclassifiable as either real or unreal, because it is real in the sense that we do experience it, but unreal in the sense that it is ever changing, and dream like if you look at either the past or future (you could only ascertain the present moment as real, and past and future only in terms of cause-effect). For the enlightened, "God alone is, and everything is not" (paraphrasing swamiji paraphrasing Swami Vivekananda)
At first see who are you. The answer is Atman/Brahman. Realise yourself as the Self. Then see does the Self have ignorance about itself? The answer is no. Then why you bother asking the question?
Also, Brahman has taken form of the mind. The purpose of the mind is to be ignorant ar first then do spiritual sadhana then to become enlightened. Therefore, don't worry with the question.
Absurd answer.
Ashrayanupapatti: What is the locus or support of Maya? Where does Avidya reside? If there is any such thing as Maya or Avidya, we are justified in asking for its seat or abode. Verily it cannot exist in Brahman, for then the nondualism of Brahman would break down. Moreover, Brahman is said to be pure self luminous consciousness or knowledge and Avidya means ignorance. Then how can ignorance exist in knowledge? Again, Avidya cannot reside in the indvidual self, for the individuality of the self is said to be the creation of Avidya. How can the cause depend on its effect? Hence
Avidya cannot exist either in Brahman or in Jiva. It is an illusory concept, a figment of the Advaitin's imagination. If it resides
anywhere, it resides only in the mind of the Advaitin who has imagined this wonderful pseufo-concept, this logical myth
TirodhAnanupapatti: How can Avidya conceal Brahman? If it does, then Brahman is not self-conscious and self-luminous
subject. If Brahman is of the nature of self-luminosity and self-proved pure
knowledge, Ignorance cannot cover or veil its essence. It is as absurd as to say that darkness can hide light or that night can
act as a veil on day.
Svarupanupapatti: What is the nature of Avidya? Is it positive(real) or negative
or both or neither? If it is positive then how can it be Avidya? Avidya means ignorance and ignorance means absence of knowledge. To regard Ignorance as positive is to accept self-contradiction. Moreover if Ignorance is positive, how can it be ever
destroyed? No positive entity can be destroyed. As the Advaitin admits that ignorance is removed by Knowledge, Ignorance can never be positive. And if Avidya is negative , then how can
it project this world illusion on Brahman? To Say that Avidya is both positive and
negative is to embrace self-contradiction.
And to say that it is neither positive nor negative is to give up all logic.
@TheEmptyBeing Joke answer. By such illogical answers, the Adwaitins have made a joke of studying scriptures.
Toilet paper?
Namaskaram Swamiji 🙏🌷
🙏🙏