Swami Medhananda’s (Ayon Maharaj's) book, Swami Vivekananda’s Vedantic Cosmopolitanism, is available in: United States: www.amazon.com/dp/0197624464 South Asian Countries: www.amazon.in/dp/0197663753 Register for Swami Medhananda’s Vedanta Life Academy Course “The Philosophy of Swami Vivekananda” at: www.vedantalifeacademy.com/course/the-philosophy-of-swami-vivekananda
I have a question for swami Sarvpriyananda ji that "We all say that atma(consciousness) is inactive. But when drasta (atma or consciousness) is aware of all the activities of the mind . Then, how can I say that atma is inactive? Because it is always watching the mind " .
@@googleg5877 probably because this would involve some very divisive politics! Vivekanander gave a different message in India than he did to “Westeners” there is no secret about that. And these issues are very much “hot button” now. Strange where the internet will take you when yo get on a certain subject!
I would absolutely love to register for Swami Medhananda’s upcoming course but the time Pacific Standard Time and I am in Western Europe meaning that for us, European sādhaks it is not feasible. Immensely regret that …
Swami Medhananda's interpretation of the teachings of Ramakrishna and Vivekananda really feels like a breath of fresh air to my soul. I always struggled with the strictly traditional Advaita take on Ramakrishna's words, and I have always felt dissatisfied with Hick's pluralist hypothesis. Swami not only sheds greater light on Ramakrishna and Vivekananda, but also offers, to my mind, a more satisfying and non-hierarchical understanding of religious pluralism; one that affords both dualistic and non-dualistic religious experiences and traditions, their full dignity.
Thank you so much for uploading this wonderful lecture by Swami Medhananda. I think, I can feel Thakur and Swamiji more and more deeply and realistically through listening to his talks. They actually purify my soul. So I understand Them better. Thank you. 🌈😇🙏🙋
Sato Sato Pranam Maharaj Swami Medhanandaji.. OMG !!! I'm Really Surprising to Listening Your Bengali Pronounciation OMG R U A Bengali !!!! First Time I'm Listening You ... Sotty Kato Janamer Tapossa Sanchito Royeche Aponader Modhye Tabei Na Thakurer Sonar Chele... Kash Amrao jodi tar Kinchit Petam...!!!!!
I think, the three stages still hold valid and this is also supported by the scriptures. 'Vasudevah Sarvam Iti' is the ultimate realisation. As long as we haven't realised the non-dual reality, our spiritual journey is still incomplete. Even from a Bhakti perspective, pure bhakti is possible only after the realisation of Brahman.
This is very bad . One must not compare two monks , specially when one is Acharya n other was his student. None of them asked their rating. Hope You have watched where Swami Sarvapriyananda ji was praying for Ayon Maharaj 's bright service to Ramakrishna Mission 🙏🕉️. Jai MAA
I'm very fond of Swami Medhananda Ji's scholarly lectures, his luminous talks. They really help me feel Thakur and Swamiji more deeply and truly. My pronam to him. 🙏🙋
I personally think swami Vivekananda's criticism for Shankara was not correct. He indeed was an avatara. Even though he said Jagat Mithya but he never practiced apathy. He was one of the most active persons among any avataras. Why would you consider Buddha to be compassionate and Shankara merely hard hearted? Did he not teach people? Did he not setup temples for people? Did he not establish the Hindus dasanami order? Was he not a bhakta of the highest order? How can someone write so many hymns if his heart is not flowing with bhakti? His immense rationality is sometimes taken as hard heartedness which is not correct.
I agree. Even though Shankara was an advaitin, he composed several devotional songs in the latter part of his life, the Bhajagovindam being the most famous. Besides, Shankara did not make up the now famous Jagat Mithya statement; that phrase appears in the Niralamba Upanishad. Shankara merely explained it. Shankara was a jagatguru. Medhananda may be a brilliant thinker but his style and delivery appeared to me to be dripping in arrogance. These exercises of comparing are quite useless. The great atyashrami Bhagavan Ramana Maharshi, whose preaching was largely through silence, would quickly cut down such questions (as to whose approach is better or more correct etc.). He would say, "first realize what they have realized, then talk". I think Medhanada would be better off doing that in the aashraya of his guru.
If you just hear the Criticisms, you will not understand any thing. Please read the reasons behind the criticisms. Mainly in the book " Talks with Swami Vivekananda " you can see Swamiji has Criticized Shankaracharya for his Casteist mentality. The Birth based Casteism which Shankaracharya preached is disgraceful and led to the downfall of India and Hinduism.
@@prathibananjundiah368 Only Praises are welcome and scholarly criticisms are not .. ?? Birth based caste system which Shankaracharya took so much Pride in has led to the downfall of India and HInduism. Even today, Shankara Mutts preaching the disgraceful Birth based superiority complex is a Cancer that should be weeded out of India.
To the woman who asked the first question (during the live session) about experiencing fear when she meditates (I don't remember her name; but she started very humbly with "I'm not well read..."): The fear you experience is a sign of progress. It is the ego breaking up and hence the fear. That is to say, your consciousness is still centered largely in the body-mind complex, AND now that is breaking, and your consciousness hasn't found anything else to anchor to. Hence you feel fear. To overcome this fear, ask yourself the question: "to whom is this fear?" The answer would/should be: "To me." Then ask the question: "Who is the 'I' to whom this 'me' refers." Do this recursively, ie, again and again, for every thought, essentially asking 'for whom is this thought' and then asking 'who am I'. Then your consciousness will slowly (or instantly) shift to become centered in your Atma, that is, your Infiniteness which is your true and essential nature. And your fear will slowly (or instantly) subside/vanish. I dearly hope this message reaches you.
another tool is the WORK of Byron Katie. many youtubes and yu can find her site on line. it is another form of Self In\quiry but more pertinent to this day and age where there is so much spiritual by passing by meditators. also, many buddhist tools available and Pema Choden and Tara Brach have wonderful teachings on line as well.
Thank you swamiji, really as a devotee of Sri Ramakrishna math, many time I doubt that whether the Shankar's advaith and Sri Sri RamAkrishna's advith are one or different, this kind of lecturing new and few. Swamijis like yourself and swami Sarvapriyananda and shuddathmananda of Advaitha Ashram can resolve this kind of subject
Maharaj the lecture was very well structured and eye opening. Please don't go in a hurried fashion, slow done a bit. Give some time to catch up.. please.🙏
That’s a bold move; to criticise members of your prior audience as lazy, and say that no one can criticise the content of your lecture unless they also buy and read your entire book.
He just spoke like a true academic. It is not uncommon for thoroughbred academics and professors to set criteria & expect certain standards for discussing their work - mainly because they know without that it would just be an unproductive and confusion-creating exercise wasting everyone's time and offering no real understanding of the topic .
43:08 Here Swamiji is critical about ignoring the underprivileged ones in the name of paramarthika and vyavaharika etc. failing to see God in the poor, in the underprivileged ones etc. But, paramarthika and vyavaharika standpoints are not invalid by themselves.
This breaks swamiji to a more humane level for me . Being brought up in a household of Sri Ramakrishna followers i developed a tendency to see his teaching as divine precepts, unquestionable by ordinary mind, but now i think of him more humanely, though still divine.
On further thought, this lecture is an Excellent deep dive on subtle nuances in Vedanta espoused by different teachers over time 🙏🙏🙏 There is a 7th one that I can recall, based on Swami Sarvapriyanandji’s lectures - Hindus worship both a transcendent and immanent God. A God who transcends every thing that our senses and mind can comprehend - the Neti Neti Neti, process of negation as well as an immanent God that is part of everything and anything that we know of or perceive or conceive of… In this context, it is pertinent to recall the frequently asked question - “Doesn’t the scriptures say - Avaang Manasa Gocharam? Isn’t Brahman something that cannot be comprehended by the Mind because Brahman is beyond the Mind? A different part of the scriptures say - Manase veda maptavyam - Brahman can only be reached through our Minds. Aren’t Upanishads also contradictory? Adi Shankara clarifies - Su Samskrutena Manasa - only a pure mind will be able to comprehend Brahman. As Lord Krishna says in verse 16 of chapter-2, nasato vidyate bhavo nabhavo vidyate satah ubhayorapi drishto ’nta stvanayos tattva-darshibhih Of the transient there is no endurance, and of the eternal there is no cessation. This has verily been observed and concluded by the seers of the Truth, after studying the nature of both. For the common folk like us, it is best to remember and understand the Covering (Aavarana ) and Projection (Vikshepa ) Sakthi of ignorance that deluded us all. As Sri Ramakrishna mentioned, ignorance is like the water cress that blocks the sunlight reflected in a village pond, it needs to be pushed aside with some effort. We need to make conscious efforts to keep ourselves reminded that we live in ignorance that deludes us all the time..Human Mind can only focus on an object and a manifested Lord Krishna is a better way to focus the mind alongside meditation on an impersonal God. As Swami Medhananda eloquently laid out in this lecture, It is best to Combine the 4 yogas to the best of our abilities, to accelerate our own spiritual progress by taking advantage of/ utilizing the various aspects of our own personality and for developing a balanced and well rounded one… A very comprehensive lecture indeed…🙏
Fire Brand Swami Ji .. ! Loved your lecture. It was hard hitting , thought provoking well rounded :) Swami Sarvapriyananda ji usually prefers to remain diplomatic but you are UNSTOPPABLE !!!
@@anithapandit852 Ji, His scholarly opinions have sure let the cat amidst pigeons !! Also, for the most part, Medananda ji was bringing out Swami Vivekananda's commentaries and not giving his own opinion . It's a welcome change for the minds which are used to honey dipped sugary talks of our beloved Sarvapriyananda ji :)
Sankara's emphasis onadvaita - Brahma Satya, Jagat Mithya. Swami Vivekananda's emphasis on Advaitic doctrine - Jiva Brahmaiva, na aparah. His teaching is summarized in Sakhar Prati poem.
It’s a pity Swamiji Sarvapriyananda’s ‘soothing balm’ in the end is left out in this video. 😇 Kudos to Swamiji Medhananda 🙏 for a well researched talk & the book. 🙏
Was it you who asked the first question in his live session... asking, or at least trying to ask about your personal practice when Medhananda cut you short curtly? It was a question about experiencing fear in your meditation practice. If you're that person, I've posted a reply elsewhere for you. Happy to copy-paste it here if you haven't seen it.
Thank you, Kiran. 🙏😊 No, it was not me who asked this question. I asked another question but did not get a convincing answer. Will have to get some clarity from Swamiji Sarvapriyananda regarding my question. 🙏😇
Unnecessary comparison of great souls, Shankara, Swami Vivekananda and Sri Ramakrishna. All great teachers teach both the lower and higher truths. It depends on the capacity of the sadhaka, as to which teaching appeals to them. If the higher teaching is not understood it does not mean we should try to fit these great souls into our limited understanding.
There's nothing wrong with this. Swami Sarvapriyananda for instance focuses on the similarities between the teachings of Adi Shankaracharya & Ramakrishna, but it is equally necessary to understand the differences as well. The hierarchical system as taught by the followers of Shankaracharya, is no doubt a valid path, but from that perspective it's very difficult to understand/respect the views of others like bhaktas, for instance. Advaitins in general have a tendency to downplay devotion, and it can even be properly justified through the reasoning of Shankaracharya, and I have come across such people myself, who really think that as long as one doesn't compromise upon the ideals of advaita, bhakti is not possible, and they really see bhaktas as those who are under the influence of ignorance, even they consider bhakti as a sweet child of ignorance. The way Swami Sarvapriyananda teaches Advaita is keeping with view the teachings of Ramakrishna-Vivekananda as well. But if you come across a hard core Advaitin, you will understand the difference.
@@durga.prasad see the problem with focusing on or imagining differences is that these kinds of things creates factions. If Sri Ramakrishna taught 10 different things and 10 people in their misunderstanding each took one of the teaching and said that is the gospel truth then we can have 10 factions. This is how an organization decays. The problem is not with the teachers, they try to take everyone together, the problem is in our misunderstanding.
@@arjunrathore8950U agree that we should avoid unnecessary divisions. However, we cannot ignore a more precise understanding of reality due to our fear of creating factions. Satyamev Jayate. Even if the truth temporarily constructs factions, it has the potential to ultimately unify.
My own humble investigations undertaken as unbiasedly as possible have also gradually led me to the very same conclusion. Not for nothing has it been called Sanatan or the great eternal through the ages. It is the only grand expansive umbrella or a superset under which a variety of subsets can flourish for various temperaments or need as the case may be,
The major task before Shankara was negation of shoonyawada which was widespread at that time . The adhikari of Vedanta is a virtuous student who possesses divine qualities . So needless to say that Shankara did not emphasize it independently , It was presumed .
Isn't there just one Truth? Surely if all these great Enlightened beings are not able to agree on the Truth, then it must mean that the real Truth is beyond even their reach.....I guess only death will reveal the Truth
While opposing views are always permissable, surely one should maintain a courtesy in discourse. Swamiji though young - speaking quickly and not remembering we may be not as erudite - gives us such a huge biblio and thoughts to continue our own Search. Perhaps Swamiji is a little intimidating ... I am quite sure he does not intend that. His Service is currently to share with those who appreciate his erudition and analyses. If we have useful contributions they are surely welcome to all. Even if utter disgreement is interesting IF expressed without name-calling and verbal abuse. I wish him Grace and blessings on his search for enlightenment.
By 'Through jnana alone one attains Moksha', Shankaracharya meant Brahma-jnana / Self-realization and not just the path of jnana yoga. न तु *ब्रह्मविज्ञानव्यतिरेकेण* अन्यन्मोक्षसाधनम् अवगम्यते No other means of liberation are known except the knowledge of Brahman. ~ Brihadaranyaka Upanishad Bhasya 1.4.7. दृश्यते हि *एकत्वविज्ञानाद्* एव अनवगमनिवृत्तिः We actually see that the knowledge of unity alone dispels ignorance. ~ Ibid. 1.4.10 *Note:* He has used the term 'Brahma-vijnana' which is nothing but immediate realisation or Aparoksha anubhuti as per Shankaracharya.
Brahman (Supreme being) has infinite dimensions. All aspects are on equal footing and true when you look at the infinite reality from that angle. What is true from one aspect, seem to have contradiction from another angle or aspect, but all are true. God is Satyam, Jnanam, Anantam, Avyayam, Avyaktam. Words fail to describe God beyond a point of their realisation and understanding, be it from Adi Shankaracharya, Ramakrishna Paramahamsa or Swami Vivekananda. No one is superior to other, or a final authority on Brahman. The Brahman may reveal to you as Spacetime, Quantum energy, Pure Maths, Dwaita, Visistadvaita, or Advaita. All are real and all are truths. That is why even Swami Vivekananda appears to contradict at times on what said earlier, but what he said at that moment has to be seen from that context of the subject he was talking. The talk by Swami Medhananda seem pure academic and confusing. It does more harm than good to Hinduism as it shows that Hinduism is full of fissures which it is not. Didn't Sri Ramakrishna said that one is not eligible to preach unless one is self realised? What authority one has to talk on these subjects except as academic outpourings collected from different books with a feeling from transactional level? Are the thoughts emanating from a 'realised soul'? A soul searching time and good to be silent until that time.
True, without self-realization it's like blind leading blind. Even, I think vijnana can be understood rightly only after Self-realization. I feel the difference between a jivanmukta and a vijnani is not in the realisation but only in the outlook. This is what Swami Vivekananda also taught in one place where he describes about the outlook of an acharya and a jivanmukta, although both have realised that the world (as understood by us) is mithya.
Swamiji is extremely well read and academically disciplined. Yes, it would be wonderful to be guided by a realised soul. In the meanwhile we study and learn, while following the advice of prayer and meditation and service. It is gift to us on the first requirement to have Swamiji inform and explain many points and to unravel some knots.
As an Advaitin who is not a sanyasi/sanyasin and who is not familiar with the specifics of how they get ordained, it is my assumption that all sanyasis/sanyasins of the Ramakrishna Math are ordained as members of the Puri order of monastics established by Sri Shankaracharya. Now, if I further assume that what was presented in this video is true, then it seems to me that Swami Vivekananda had serious reservations about Sri Shankaracharya’s interpretation and presentation of the vision of the Upanishads. If that was the case, and if Swami Vivekananda felt that these flaws or deficiencies in Shankara’s teachings were detrimental for our pursuit of moksha, I wonder why he chose not to disassociate his monastic order from the Puri order of Shankaracharya. Seems to me that he could have, for instance, chosen to have the monastic order remain unaffiliated. -akin to how the Self-Realization Fellowship operates now- For non-monastics like me, the choice of the teachings we adopt to further our pursuit of moksha is perhaps the most important decision we make in our life since what we may lose from an inapt choice is immeasurable. I am confident that Swami Vivekananda was aware of the plight of folks like me. Therefore, I am somehow reluctant to believe that he would just choose to be ambivalent about this subject and leave us in the lurch to fend for ourselves. So, I am confused by this discordance.
Love your succinct yet wholesome, kind, thoughtful and truthful repudiation of Medhananda's discourse. My style would be to simply say, there's nothing of Ramakrishna or Vivekananda in him. I hope his guru's grace will protect him when he falls from his self made perch.
@@Zenzonighte Could it be that this critique of Shankara’s teachings is just Ishvara providing us an opportunity to reflect upon and strengthen our understanding of Shankara’s teachings and, thereby, progress in our moksha quest?
@@rsr9200 Indeed, as you say, this could be Ishvara's way of providing that slight push and motivation to stay true to our paths when we are weary and a bit distracted. 🙏
Have you checked whether shankaracharya mutt has accepted swami vivekananda a disciple of shankaracharya? Please consult Sringeri Puri Joshi Dwaraka Second- you are right ramakrishna math has accepted the sannayasa order as per dasanami. Was this really recommended by sri ramakrishna? Third they immediately say ramakrishna took sannyasa from totapuri. Why he took? Answer - ramakrishna taught totapuri vedanta and other way. Ramakrishna math is like a sanctuary. As many paths so many faiths. All vedanta schools are accepted and upheld as equal. It is choice of all aspirants to choose his/her school and practice under guidance of sri ramakrishna. There are some monks who are narrow minded and neglect this catholicity of ramakrishna and preach only shankara world negating advaita.
@@regardsk3815 Not sure what you mean when you ask “Have you checked whether shankaracharya mutt has accepted swami vivekananda a disciple of shankaracharya?”. Although there is some dispute as to when Sri Shankaracharya was born, I am reasonably certain that no one disputes that Swami Vivekananda was born centuries after Shankara. That being the case, how is it possible for Swami Vivekananda to have been a disciple of Sri Shankaracharya? Also, I am not aware of Swami Vivekananda claiming that he was a disciple of Sri Shankaracharya in some previous birth. So, the question seems invalid to me. Whether the decision of Swami Vivekananda to affiliate with Shankara’s dasanami sampradaya had the blessings of Sri Ramakrishna is a question that only Swami Vivekananda, his brother disciples, or Sri Sarada Devi might have known. If Sri Ramakrishna had serious reservation about this, I would imagine that Sri Sarada Devi would have persuaded Swami Vivekananda to abandon this course of action and she would have guided him on an alternate course. That said, it is my assumption that before any Swami at RK Math takes his vows of sanyasa he has been fully apprised of the teachings of Shankara, the founder of the dasanami monastic lineage he is about to embrace. So, it seems to me that if said Swami felt strongly that Shankara’s teachings were detrimental to his pursuit of moksha, he would be reluctant to affiliate himself with the dasanami sampradaya of Shankara. I am assuming, of course, that the RK Math does not offer their brahmacharis the choice of being a monk affiliated with the Math alone without being initiated into Shankara’s sampradaya. If my assumptions are wrong, then what I say in this para and the next may be ignored. As I see it, a sanyasi’s embrace of a sampradaya implies his embrace of all the tenets of that sampradaya. So, as a non-monastic, I am surprised when I hear acharyas (teachers) deprecate their own chosen sampradaya. It makes me wonder how they will be able to guide us in making the right choice of teachings if they themselves are unsure or ambivalent about the choice they made.
Hairsplitting on The 4 Yogas and their variations Prapatti or Saranagati in Bhakti Yoga involves complete surrender to the will of the Lord. It leads to the eradication of one’s false ego. Every human being spends his/her waking state under the delusion or Maya (Beginning-less Ignorance) that he is the Doer (Kartha) and Enjoyer (Bhoktha). To get rid of this ignorance, to eliminate this Vritti/Samskara/Vasana (Inclination or propensity) that got perpetuated in our mind, over many lifetimes, requires enormous effort only because human beings are creatures of habit. Swami Tyagananda of Ramakrishna order (Boston) once explained that each of the 4 Yogas are like different paths that lead to the same mountain top - ADMK - (1) Action - selfless service to the society or doing one’s duty without attachment to its outcomes (Karma Yoga), (2) Devotion - Complete surrender to the will of the Lord (Bhakti Yoga) (3) Meditation: Cessation of the vagaries of the mind (Raja Yoga) or (4) Knowledge : Acquiring knowledge of the ultimate reality (Paramardhika Satta) which will liberate one’s mind from ignorance. Chakravarthi Rajagopalachari’s commentary in his prelude to the famous Bhajagovindam song is worth remembering in this context - “ Adi Shankaracharya wrote a number of Vedantic works for imparting knowledge of the Self and the Universal Spirit. He also composed a number of hymns to foster Bhakti in the hearts of men. One of these hymns is the famous Bhaja Govindam. The way of devotion, is not different from the way of knowledge or Jnana. When intelligence matures and lodges securely in the mind, it becomes wisdom. When wisdom is integrated with life and issues out in action, it becomes Bhakti. Knowledge, when it becomes fully mature is Bhakti. If it does not get transformed into Bhakti, such knowledge is useless tinsel. To believe that Jnana and Bhakti, knowledge and devotion are different from each other, is ignorance. If Sri Adi Shankara himself who drank the ocean of Jnana as easily as one sip’s water from the palm of one’s hand, sang in his later years, hymns to develop devotion, it is enough to show that Jnana and Bhakti are one and the same. Sri Shankara has packed into the Bhaja Govindam song: the substance of all vedanta, and set the oneness of Jnana and Bhakti to melodious music.” Cessation of the false ego is the intent behind the 4 Yogas - none of the paths are superior or inferior to the other. Adi Shankara, unlike his teacher’s teacher Gaudapada, was considered Jagadguru (Teacher of the World) only because he could unite the different schools of thought prevailing at that time in India. He didn’t teach that Gnaana Yoga was the only way to get liberated from this unending cycle of birth & death. Lord Krishna dedicated an entire chapter 12 (20 verses) to Bhakti Yoga and even mentions that it will be the easiest path to attain HIM 🙏
*Shankaracharya Gita Bhasya 13.18:* (Question):-Who is fit to attain this right knowledge ? (Answer):-He who is devoted to Me, who regards Me-Vasudeva, the Supreme Lord, the Omniscient, the Supreme Guru-as the Self (Soul, Essence) of everything, i.e., he who is possessed (as it were) with the idea that all that he sees or hears or touches is nothing but the Lord, Vasudeva. Thus devoted to Me, and having attained the right knowledge described above, he is fit to attain to My state, i.e., he attains moksha. How's this different from Vijnana?
Shankara accepts duality within paradigm of illusion. He writes his bhasya or gloss as per your understanding wherever duality concept occurs in gita. Universe does not exist in reality but exist out of ignorance +Brahman. To achieve non-duality, one has to remove the ignorance, thus Universe will cease to exist. Living beings are out of ignorance, Matter is out of ignorance. Both don't exist in reality. Liberation as per shankaracharya is to remove the universe. There is no seer, seeing and seen. Vijnana vedanta- sri ramakrisha states that after removing worldliness, world will remain. Brahman, living beings and world will remain together as one whole. This is ramanuja advaita but swami medhananda, does not agree. This just shows how much he studied ramnuja commentary of Brahma sutra.
"Liberation as per Shankara is to remove the universe"....lol. You just completely ignored concept of Jivanmukti in Advaita. In liberation, there are two types of Jnana that dispel two different aspects of avidya - concealment and projection. When the concealment aspect of Avidya is removed the person becomes a Jeevan mukta for whom the world still continues to exist, and when all pre-accumulated karma of that person are exhausted, the person becomes a bidehamukta, post death. The so-called Vijnana Vedanta is only for the jivanmukta. If Swami Medhananda's Vijnana has to be ultimately true, then the state of vijnana must exist for the liberated person even after death, which would mean that rebirth doesn't end for that person. If the state of vijana does end at death, how is it the ultimate form of liberation?
@@nirjhardas7333 Liberation as per Shankara is to remove the universe"....lol. You just completely ignored the concept of Jivanmukti in Advaita. What is Jivanmukti as per shankara ? This concept in the shankara philosophy is a self-contradiction-- This is just kept to motivate people to follow shankara's philosophy. I am not commenting about Shankara's Bhakti bhava.This is described in Vivekachudamani------- 426 to 479---- Please go through this in detail. Still I shall explain to your Verse- 426Jivanmukti - is free from KarmaVijnana Vedanta-- He does karma Verse 427Jivanmukti- is free from dualityVijnana Vedanta- Duality is there along with Integral Unity. Verse 428- 431Jivanmukti-- has forgotten this UniverseVijnana Vedanta- Universe is not forgotten but rather used to remember the Unity Verse 436Jivanmukti-- devoid dutiesVijnana Vedanta- Serving man as God Verse 439Jivanmukti-- He does not differentiate Jiva and Brahma and Universe--- Why? He knows Brahman with Upadhi is Jiva and Universe. These do not exist. This is the illumination knowledge one maintains.Vijnana Vedanta- there is no Upadhi-- Brahman + Jiva+ Universe and together as Integral whole as one. Verse 447Jivanmukti-- Once attain Jiva and Brahman are same-- Karma ceases to exist - There is no dream once you wake up. Experience as dreamt may be there- but it will vanishingVijnana Vedanta-- Nothing is dream here- Only Jivatma who felt separate from whole - realize the integral non-duality of oneness- Like Water, fish and rocks-- Ocean- inseparable. Verse 448 to 454Jivanmukti-- No least action and meaninglessVijnana vedanta- Jivatma thinks the world is converted from Illusion to mirth. Verse 460 to 479d---Jivanmukti-- Becomes immovable Though he livesVijnana vedanta-- Jivatma experiences Brahman in difference with Integral Unvity- Like fish and water - both are not same- but eternally inseparable. Coming to Jivanmukti concept in Advaita Vedanta-- Is it logical according to their own Philosophical Exposition- Brahma Satyam- Jagat Mithya - Jivo Brahmaiva na paraha: What is the meaning of Jivan mukti?Jivan Mukta states that it is achieved after realization-- what is the realization according to Shankara ? Jagat is Mithya-- This mitya as be removed-False snake has to be removed by the Guru’s wording that “ this is not a snake but rope”. According to Realization of That tvam Asi-- Jivatma has to give up its body, mind concept and Paramatma has to give up its Universal concept- What result is one Consciousness--- Non-dual Brahman-- No second thing. This is achieved by a Jivan Mukta------------You are saying Prarabdha Karma is still left ? This prarabdha karma is for Jivatma or Brahman?You cannot say Jivatma because-- Jivatma itself is a result of Illusion like God. Further issues--What is the meaning of this term? 1. the Cessation of the body while embodied 2. the Cessation of the appearance of the body 3. the Cessation of the activities depending on the body 4. the cessation of the merits and demerits accruing from the function of the body etc 5. the cessation of the pleasure and paid cause by it 6. the cessation of something else. Please chose from above choice or advise if you have any other apart from Prarabda karma.
@@durga.prasad please do write. Let me read your understanding. Please write Nature of Brahman Nature of individual soul Nature of matter It's relationship How many realities are there? What is attributeless? How this appearance occur? What is meant by adhyasa? How to remove it? Removing knowledge comes from where? Where is this adhyasa?
Logical fallacy when one says nirguna [ as per shankaracharya] and saguna [ as per ramanuja] on Brahman. Swami here is taking them as opposites. How? Answer. Nature of Brahman in vedanta have no parts and changes. This is strictly maintained by all vedanta schools. If one says Brahman is both nirguna and saguna- Question This dual opposite characters are nature of Brahman or quality of Brahma?. Answer- if you say it is nature of Brahman. Brahman will be have parts. This is unacceptable. This is something like sun is half heat and half cold. No where such a mistake is made by nature. If you say these opposites are attributes, then Brahman is qualified. Eg sun is always emitting heat rays but due to cloudy sometime we feel cool though sun is up.
Pranam maharaj, This discourse is very thought provoking, well researched work, well structured, resulting in high impact on the devotees of Sree Ramakrishna Ashrama. Without listening to your discourse I feel ( devotees) my lunch / dinner is incomplete . 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏. Anantha Namaskaras to GURUMAHARAJ for providing swamiji’s like you to His devotees.
Viveka had escaped Swami Vivekananda when he says Shankara was a mere intellectual. Has SV even read works of Shankara apart from his Brahma sootra. So much compassion ex Bhavani ashtakam, guru ashtakam, nadi stotram, narmada, ganga , Shivanandha lahari, wherein he becomes so humble and meek and heart melting love to Ishwara as various deities. 2) Who are we to have compassion Rk said, but SV says Shankara didn't have compassion, but these avatars had compassion!! What a blaring contradiction 3) Rk said when asked what is that one practice to be done "- brohmo sotyom jogon miththo " and then he fell silent. 4) Whether part of whole or servant of god, Shankara in his Sadhana panchakam in the second line of the first verse says "taduitam karma svanushteeyataam, teneshasya vidheeyataam apachitih" Do whatever duties are ordained to you according to those scriptures , and do it with a sense of doing worship to God(Isha) Bhagavad geeta says the same -" sve sve karmani abhiratah samsiddhim labhate narah" just doing ones own duties of life one reached fulfilment. No need for charity if everyone just did their injucted duties where charity and daana was the duty of a king /politician not spiritual organisations to run hospitals /schools / orphanages.. These are duties and responsiblities of a king /political entity. If they did their job well why wud RK mission need to do it. A spiritual organisations duty is to teach and propagate their teaching not to do service of sick patients. This Shankara understood very well... 5) If soul is a part of god does it follow that it must surrender or act as a servant? Why should it? Does the finger surrender to hair? Does finger surrender to the body? Why should it? Wouldn't that mean a part of god is surrendering to a larger part of god? Does that mean the finger is less important than the hand? 6) jnana as in the experience and wisdom of the unity of reality ,is what liberates finally. Otherwise why would RK need to be taught by his guru Totapuri , if his vijanana love of personal god was sufficient and on same level as advaita. Obviously there is a need fulfilled by jnana which is not done by karma or bhakti. Hence jnana yoga is privileged by Shankara. Kabir also said "Nirguna galiyaan" song wherein he said only if we walked the nirguna path will "aavaagamana mit jaay" coming and going as in birth and death will be erased.
Sir, before we discuss on the other points, I wanted to understand that why do followers of Shankaracharya in general maintain that only jnana yoga alone can lead to moksha, while the scriptures support all the four ways? For instance, Lord Krishna says in Gita: ध्यानेनात्मनि पश्यन्ति केचिदात्मानमात्मना । अन्ये सांख्येन योगेन कर्मयोगेन चापरे । Some by meditation behold the Self in the self by the self, others by the Yoga of knowledge, and still others by the Yoga of action. - Bhagavad Gita, 13.25 Shankaracharya too writes in his introduction to the above verse: अत्र आत्मदर्शने उपायविकल्पाः इमे ध्यानादयः उच्यन्ते Here are being presented these meditation etc. which are the alternative means for the realization of the Self. Lord Shiva says in Ishvara Gita: ध्यानेन मां प्रपश्यन्ति केचिज्ज्ञानेन चापरे । अपरे भक्तियोगेन कर्मयोगेन चापरे । Some behold me through meditation, some through knowledge and a few others through devotion, and other people by the path of action. - Ishvara Gita 4.24 and Devi says to Himavanta in Kurma Purana: ध्यानेन कर्मयोगेन भक्त्या ज्ञानेन चैव हि । प्राप्याहं ते गिरिश्रेष्ठ नान्यथा कर्मकोटिभिः ॥ गिरिश्रेष्ठ! मैं ध्यान, कर्मयोग, भक्ति तथा ज्ञानके द्वारा ही तुम्हारे लिये प्राप्य हूँ, दूसरे करोड़ों कर्मोंके द्वारा मुझे प्राप्त नहीं किया जा सकता। - Kurma Purana, Purva Bhaga, 11.264 Isn't it a mistake to equate karma with the path of karma-yoga?
@@durga.prasad thanks for ur response. 1) Why only jnana? Jnaana is considered the final step towards Moksha. Karma and bhakti are preparatory and equally important and helpful. यज् ज्ञात्वा न पुनर् मोहम् एवं यास्यसि पाण्डव । येन भूतान्यशेषेण द्रक्ष्यस्यात्मन्यथो मयि ।। 4.35 gita. Only by knowledge ignorance is removed . that knowledge is " seeing" all beings in self and thence in me. This is jnana. 7.17 of all of them who seek me, the Jnani is best because he is verily me. But I agree the geeta eulogises bhakta as the greatest in one chapter , a yogi in another, a karmin in another , a jnanin in another.. But the final leap in the journey to attaining Brahman and destroying the cycle of birth and death for the soul is through impersonal jnana- 13.30, The jnana /wisdom to see unity in all is Sattvika jnana -18.20 and to see things as separate and different(bhedas) is Rajasika 18.21 and to have no philosophy and just be engaged in some action of body /identified with body is tamasika. 2) Karma and karma yoga- It is clear- to do ones ordained duties (accoeding to their capabilities ,influences at birth and circumstances ) in the spirit of worship of Ishwara, not attaching to results or expecting anything in return, without feeling elated or dejected in success and failures of those actions, is Karma yoga which leads to Naishkarmya siddhi 18.49. Finally after achieving this to move towards Brahman 18.50 , one must do dhyana 18.51-53 letting go of ego, then one gets equanimity and bhakti 18.54 , then the bhakti finally KNOWS "me" in reality and as I am. Immediately he abides in me.(Brahman) To those who love me incessantly, I provide the final Buddhiyoga(jnana) so that they can come to me. I destroy their darkness of ignorance with the light of knowledge. 10.10,10.11 So it is clear the sequence Even Shri Krishna says towards Moksha. Hence the privilege that Shankara gives to Jnana. Just as on the journey to an old home of ours, we take car, bus, then walk, then eat food along the way, etc but are always aware and cautious of the key which open the door. Becoz without that the journey is a waste and fruitless. Although each of the other aspects of travel also contributed such as car, food, walking, etc... equally.. So in that sense , naturally we privilege the key. Only in that sense similarly , Shankara privileges jnana
@@sudarshanravi1565 //Finally after achieving this to move towards Brahman 18.50, one must do dhyana 18.51-53 letting go of ego, then one gets equanimity and bhakti 18.54, then the bhakti finally KNOWS "me" in reality and as I am. Immediately he abides in me.(Brahman)...// That's one way, however, it further continues with the karma yoga too... 56. Doing all actions always, taking refuge in Me, by My Grace he obtains the eternal, indestructible state or abode. 57. Mentally renouncing all actions in Me, having Me as the highest goal, resorting to the Yoga of discrimination do thou ever fix thy mind on Me. 58. Fixing thy mind on Me, thou shalt by My Grace overcome all obstacles; but if from egoism thou wilt not hear Me, thou shalt perish. So, a Karma-yogi too attains Self-knowledge through the grace of Ishvara. In that case, karma yoga too should be a valid path, just like the path of vichara, as both culminates in Self-knowledge. The path of vichara requires a mind that is prepared, that is fine. But, this doesn't mean that the other yogas are inferior or only act as preparatory disciplines, although they can be very helpful, undoubtedly for one following the path of vichara. However, at the final perfection in any of the 4 yogas, the aspirant attains Self-knowledge and through that liberation. I don't think there is any contradiction in this. I would like to hear your views too. Thanks.
First of all we need to understand that the awakening process, that one might go through, is not a fail safe thing that grants you knowledge and infallibility. Quite the contrary, the process of awakening is not an aquisition but a letting go. There is no knowledge in it and if you are seduced by the prospect of "discovering the truth" then you are already set yourself up for and deceived yourself. Letting go - makes empty space in your mind and consolidates the wholeness, of the piece of mind that you are "sovereign" of. Letting go trough and through leaves you COMPLETELY empty. In that state your piece of mind is whole. You are at peace. There is no substituting of ignorance for knowledge. There is only letting go. If I understand that I do not know who I am, how can I "see Brahman" in everything? To perceive oneself as limited is to "not know who you are" Why is there such a confusion in advaita then? However this confusion is easily resolved. If you are not whole then you cannot "grasp" wholeness. It is not Brahman you must see, it is Atman. You are Atman, we all are. If you look out and only see what is whithin. Then you see wholly. See YOURSELF in everything. Then you wont attack yourself, wouldnt you? We will all see Brahman togheder, when our Atman is one, whole. Right now it is in a state of separation. Brahman is in a state of pemanent Wholeness. He does not know anything about limits. For a mind to know a limit, it must split itself in parts. It is very irresponsible that in order of legitimizing limits we project the responsibility on to Brahman and say things like "Its Brahman's dream, fantasy, play, etc" It is the most basic error that the whole advaita (current one) is miopic to. Do not legitimize limits - protect oneness. Shravana, Manana, Nidhidhyasana on to the process of letting go. It is also called forgiveness, surrender, renunciation. To "let go of" one needs also understand how did he "aquire". If the mechanics of aquisition are understand then one can reverse them and let go. Ask yourself if the focus of your mind is on a limit or on limitlessness. The answer to that cuestion is by default: your mind is thinking parcially, in a limited way. To know wholeness the mind must be one/whole itself. At this moment our mind is feverishly grasping at an identity. Any identity. Our mind is under impression that in abcence of identity, it seases to exist as well. However it is not the goal to dump everything from the mind in one go, that would be indeed very traumatic to the mind. Forgiveness can be applied at ones own pace. That is why we must understand how forgiveness wors, apply it relevantly on all age groups. If humanity is to survive, it is by entering into an age of forgiveness.
Same thing happened to me yesterday. I was thinking about an eggplant and then I thought "Why have my mind become an eggplant?" Fortunately it reversed back to being just a mind and everything is fine since then...
Please consider the following points. 1. Forget about the past Shankaracharya. Look into the teachings of today's Shankara Mutts. They are teaching the absurd Birth based exclusivity and superior birth !! Refer:- Govardhan Mutt, Puri. 2. These lectures of Shankara Mutts are actually creating ignorant people who bring disrepute to our religion and also leading to societal problems. 3. I have not researched much on Ramana Maharshi. But, I have heard here and there that even he was NOT revolutionary enough to bring down the nonsense of Birth based caste system that is being professed. 4. Look into the Life of Narayan Guru. Both Spiritual and revolutionizing. 5. Am posting here , Swami Vivekananda's Criticism from " Complete Works Volume 7 " - Chapter " Conversations and Dialogues ". Condemns Shankaracharya's commentary on Brahma sutras and casteist reference to Vidura .
@@unified2002 Really? You don't see this? All they are talking about is one simple thing. Present moment awareness. Reality is what it is. No need for all the conceptualization.
Swami Medhananda’s (Ayon Maharaj's) book, Swami Vivekananda’s Vedantic Cosmopolitanism, is available in:
United States: www.amazon.com/dp/0197624464
South Asian Countries: www.amazon.in/dp/0197663753
Register for Swami Medhananda’s Vedanta Life Academy Course “The Philosophy of Swami Vivekananda” at: www.vedantalifeacademy.com/course/the-philosophy-of-swami-vivekananda
I have a question for swami Sarvpriyananda ji that
"We all say that atma(consciousness) is inactive.
But when drasta (atma or consciousness) is aware of all the activities of the mind . Then, how can I say that atma is inactive? Because it is always watching the mind " .
Swami Vivekananda's said alot about contemporary problems...what about those ??? Why blind eyes for those ???
Dear Vedanta NY team, Could you please post the Q&A session please?
@@googleg5877 probably because this would involve some very divisive politics! Vivekanander gave a different message in India than he did to “Westeners” there is no secret about that. And these issues are very much “hot button” now. Strange where the internet will take you when yo get on a certain subject!
I would absolutely love to register for Swami Medhananda’s upcoming course but the time Pacific Standard Time and I am in Western Europe meaning that for us, European sādhaks it is not feasible. Immensely regret that …
Swami Medhananda's interpretation of the teachings of Ramakrishna and Vivekananda really feels like a breath of fresh air to my soul. I always struggled with the strictly traditional Advaita take on Ramakrishna's words, and I have always felt dissatisfied with Hick's pluralist hypothesis. Swami not only sheds greater light on Ramakrishna and Vivekananda, but also offers, to my mind, a more satisfying and non-hierarchical understanding of religious pluralism; one that affords both dualistic and non-dualistic religious experiences and traditions, their full dignity.
I will definitely buy your book..
Today I saw a vast free flowing river...I guess the Ocean was there in front of you🙏🙏🙏
My humble pranams...
I've bought 2 books . They are really, truly great.
Very interesting and well-supported. Much for the Advaitan to think about. 🙏🏻
Thank you so much for uploading this wonderful lecture by Swami Medhananda. I think, I can feel Thakur and Swamiji more and more deeply and realistically through listening to his talks. They actually purify my soul. So I understand Them better. Thank you. 🌈😇🙏🙋
Thank you, swami ji, for this profound discourse.
May Maa bless you Swami ji for your work. Well done.
❤Namaskar Swamiji
Congratulations for Your Accomplishments Thanks For Your Great Sacrifice❤
Pranams❤
Sato Sato Pranam Maharaj Swami Medhanandaji.. OMG !!! I'm Really Surprising to Listening Your Bengali Pronounciation OMG R U A Bengali !!!! First Time I'm Listening You ... Sotty Kato Janamer Tapossa Sanchito Royeche Aponader Modhye Tabei Na Thakurer Sonar Chele... Kash Amrao jodi tar Kinchit Petam...!!!!!
I think, the three stages still hold valid and this is also supported by the scriptures. 'Vasudevah Sarvam Iti' is the ultimate realisation. As long as we haven't realised the non-dual reality, our spiritual journey is still incomplete. Even from a Bhakti perspective, pure bhakti is possible only after the realisation of Brahman.
Had the good opportunity to meet him near Belur Math a month ago. Had a nice 2-minute talk.😄😄
I could take his autograph at the RMIC Golpark in Kolkata when we met to attend an international seminar on Philosophy, organised by him mostly. 🙏🙋
Whatever you say, my brothers and sisters, but I miss my Swami Sarvapriyananda Maharaj Ji. Nobody beats Him in today's age.
This is very bad . One must not compare two monks , specially when one is Acharya n other was his student. None of them asked their rating. Hope You have watched where Swami Sarvapriyananda ji was praying for Ayon Maharaj 's bright service to Ramakrishna Mission 🙏🕉️. Jai MAA
His presence is so loving, never saw like him .
I'm very fond of Swami Medhananda Ji's scholarly lectures, his luminous talks. They really help me feel Thakur and Swamiji more deeply and truly. My pronam to him. 🙏🙋
I personally think swami Vivekananda's criticism for Shankara was not correct. He indeed was an avatara. Even though he said Jagat Mithya but he never practiced apathy. He was one of the most active persons among any avataras. Why would you consider Buddha to be compassionate and Shankara merely hard hearted? Did he not teach people? Did he not setup temples for people? Did he not establish the Hindus dasanami order? Was he not a bhakta of the highest order? How can someone write so many hymns if his heart is not flowing with bhakti? His immense rationality is sometimes taken as hard heartedness which is not correct.
Agreed ,,, 🔥🔥
I agree. Even though Shankara was an advaitin, he composed several devotional songs in the latter part of his life, the Bhajagovindam being the most famous. Besides, Shankara did not make up the now famous Jagat Mithya statement; that phrase appears in the Niralamba Upanishad. Shankara merely explained it. Shankara was a jagatguru. Medhananda may be a brilliant thinker but his style and delivery appeared to me to be dripping in arrogance. These exercises of comparing are quite useless. The great atyashrami Bhagavan Ramana Maharshi, whose preaching was largely through silence, would quickly cut down such questions (as to whose approach is better or more correct etc.). He would say, "first realize what they have realized, then talk". I think Medhanada would be better off doing that in the aashraya of his guru.
He was criticizing himself so have peace. He was Buddha and he was Shankara. At different times he came as acharya for fulfilling differenr needs
If you just hear the Criticisms, you will not understand any thing. Please read the reasons behind the criticisms. Mainly in the book " Talks with Swami Vivekananda " you can see Swamiji has Criticized Shankaracharya for his Casteist mentality. The Birth based Casteism which Shankaracharya preached is disgraceful and led to the downfall of India and Hinduism.
@@prathibananjundiah368 Only Praises are welcome and scholarly criticisms are not .. ?? Birth based caste system which Shankaracharya took so much Pride in has led to the downfall of India and HInduism. Even today, Shankara Mutts preaching the disgraceful Birth based superiority complex is a Cancer that should be weeded out of India.
To the woman who asked the first question (during the live session) about experiencing fear when she meditates (I don't remember her name; but she started very humbly with "I'm not well read..."): The fear you experience is a sign of progress. It is the ego breaking up and hence the fear. That is to say, your consciousness is still centered largely in the body-mind complex, AND now that is breaking, and your consciousness hasn't found anything else to anchor to. Hence you feel fear. To overcome this fear, ask yourself the question: "to whom is this fear?" The answer would/should be: "To me." Then ask the question: "Who is the 'I' to whom this 'me' refers." Do this recursively, ie, again and again, for every thought, essentially asking 'for whom is this thought' and then asking 'who am I'. Then your consciousness will slowly (or instantly) shift to become centered in your Atma, that is, your Infiniteness which is your true and essential nature. And your fear will slowly (or instantly) subside/vanish.
I dearly hope this message reaches you.
another tool is the WORK of Byron Katie. many youtubes and yu can find her site on line. it is another form of Self In\quiry but more pertinent to this day and age where there is so much spiritual by passing by meditators. also, many buddhist tools available and Pema Choden and Tara Brach have wonderful teachings on line as well.
Thank you swamiji, really as a devotee of Sri Ramakrishna math, many time I doubt that whether the Shankar's advaith and Sri Sri RamAkrishna's advith are one or different, this kind of lecturing new and few. Swamijis like yourself and swami Sarvapriyananda and shuddathmananda of Advaitha Ashram can resolve this kind of subject
So enlightening, thanks for this Swami Medhananda!!
Thank you swami maharaj
Maharaj the lecture was very well structured and eye opening. Please don't go in a hurried fashion, slow done a bit. Give some time to catch up.. please.🙏
That’s a bold move; to criticise members of your prior audience as lazy, and say that no one can criticise the content of your lecture unless they also buy and read your entire book.
Good marketing move!
He just spoke like a true academic. It is not uncommon for thoroughbred academics and professors to set criteria & expect certain standards for discussing their work - mainly because they know without that it would just be an unproductive and confusion-creating exercise wasting everyone's time and offering no real understanding of the topic .
have you seen how much his books are? i cannot afford to buy them. 'Infinite Paths' is $98!!
You are truly blessed as maa has given you wisdom for doing great works
43:08 Here Swamiji is critical about ignoring the underprivileged ones in the name of paramarthika and vyavaharika etc. failing to see God in the poor, in the underprivileged ones etc.
But, paramarthika and vyavaharika standpoints are not invalid by themselves.
Thanks swami for sharing your thoughts 🙏
This breaks swamiji to a more humane level for me . Being brought up in a household of Sri Ramakrishna followers i developed a tendency to see his teaching as divine precepts, unquestionable by ordinary mind, but now i think of him more humanely, though still divine.
Its great afterall the differenc3 is only in degree not types as Swamiji used to say
On further thought, this lecture is an Excellent deep dive on subtle nuances in Vedanta espoused by different teachers over time 🙏🙏🙏
There is a 7th one that I can recall, based on Swami Sarvapriyanandji’s lectures - Hindus worship both a transcendent and immanent God. A God who transcends every thing that our senses and mind can comprehend - the Neti Neti Neti, process of negation as well as an immanent God that is part of everything and anything that we know of or perceive or conceive of…
In this context, it is pertinent to recall the frequently asked question - “Doesn’t the scriptures say - Avaang Manasa Gocharam? Isn’t Brahman something that cannot be comprehended by the Mind because Brahman is beyond the Mind? A different part of the scriptures say - Manase veda maptavyam - Brahman can only be reached through our Minds. Aren’t Upanishads also contradictory? Adi Shankara clarifies - Su Samskrutena Manasa - only a pure mind will be able to comprehend Brahman. As Lord Krishna says in verse 16 of chapter-2,
nasato vidyate bhavo nabhavo vidyate satah
ubhayorapi drishto ’nta stvanayos tattva-darshibhih
Of the transient there is no endurance, and of the eternal there is no cessation. This has verily been observed and concluded by the seers of the Truth, after studying the nature of both.
For the common folk like us, it is best to remember and understand the Covering (Aavarana ) and Projection (Vikshepa ) Sakthi of ignorance that deluded us all. As Sri Ramakrishna mentioned, ignorance is like the water cress that blocks the sunlight reflected in a village pond, it needs to be pushed aside with some effort. We need to make conscious efforts to keep ourselves reminded that we live in ignorance that deludes us all the time..Human Mind can only focus on an object and a manifested Lord Krishna is a better way to focus the mind alongside meditation on an impersonal God.
As Swami Medhananda eloquently laid out in this lecture,
It is best to Combine the 4 yogas to the best of our abilities, to accelerate our own spiritual progress by taking advantage of/ utilizing the various aspects of our own personality and for developing a balanced and well rounded one…
A very comprehensive lecture indeed…🙏
Fire Brand Swami Ji .. ! Loved your lecture.
It was hard hitting , thought provoking well rounded :)
Swami Sarvapriyananda ji usually prefers to remain diplomatic but you are UNSTOPPABLE !!!
I agree this Swamiji is very opinionated 😁😁,nothing wrong with that...
@@anithapandit852 Ji,
His scholarly opinions have sure let the cat amidst pigeons !! Also, for the most part, Medananda ji was bringing out Swami Vivekananda's commentaries and not giving his own opinion .
It's a welcome change for the minds which are used to honey dipped sugary talks of our beloved Sarvapriyananda ji :)
Sankara's emphasis onadvaita - Brahma Satya, Jagat Mithya. Swami Vivekananda's emphasis on Advaitic doctrine - Jiva Brahmaiva, na aparah. His teaching is summarized in Sakhar Prati poem.
My sincerest regards to..Swamiji
It’s a pity Swamiji Sarvapriyananda’s ‘soothing balm’ in the end is left out in this video. 😇
Kudos to Swamiji Medhananda 🙏 for a well researched talk & the book. 🙏
Was it you who asked the first question in his live session... asking, or at least trying to ask about your personal practice when Medhananda cut you short curtly? It was a question about experiencing fear in your meditation practice. If you're that person, I've posted a reply elsewhere for you. Happy to copy-paste it here if you haven't seen it.
Thank you, Kiran. 🙏😊 No, it was not me who asked this question. I asked another question but did not get a convincing answer. Will have to get some clarity from Swamiji Sarvapriyananda regarding my question. 🙏😇
@@linaworld9463 Got it, no problem! Yes, Swami Sarvapriyananda would be the person who can clear up most questions. All the best 😊🙏
@@Zenzonighte 🙏😇
Thank you so much Swami.
Unnecessary comparison of great souls, Shankara, Swami Vivekananda and Sri Ramakrishna. All great teachers teach both the lower and higher truths. It depends on the capacity of the sadhaka, as to which teaching appeals to them. If the higher teaching is not understood it does not mean we should try to fit these great souls into our limited understanding.
There's nothing wrong with this. Swami Sarvapriyananda for instance focuses on the similarities between the teachings of Adi Shankaracharya & Ramakrishna, but it is equally necessary to understand the differences as well. The hierarchical system as taught by the followers of Shankaracharya, is no doubt a valid path, but from that perspective it's very difficult to understand/respect the views of others like bhaktas, for instance. Advaitins in general have a tendency to downplay devotion, and it can even be properly justified through the reasoning of Shankaracharya, and I have come across such people myself, who really think that as long as one doesn't compromise upon the ideals of advaita, bhakti is not possible, and they really see bhaktas as those who are under the influence of ignorance, even they consider bhakti as a sweet child of ignorance. The way Swami Sarvapriyananda teaches Advaita is keeping with view the teachings of Ramakrishna-Vivekananda as well. But if you come across a hard core Advaitin, you will understand the difference.
@@durga.prasad see the problem with focusing on or imagining differences is that these kinds of things creates factions. If Sri Ramakrishna taught 10 different things and 10 people in their misunderstanding each took one of the teaching and said that is the gospel truth then we can have 10 factions. This is how an organization decays. The problem is not with the teachers, they try to take everyone together, the problem is in our misunderstanding.
@@arjunrathore8950 I agree.
@@arjunrathore8950U agree that we should avoid unnecessary divisions. However, we cannot ignore a more precise understanding of reality due to our fear of creating factions. Satyamev Jayate. Even if the truth temporarily constructs factions, it has the potential to ultimately unify.
Sanathan dharma is the greatest religion ever.
Sikhi Buddhist Jaina are all it's babies.
My own humble investigations undertaken as unbiasedly as possible have also gradually led me to the very same conclusion. Not for nothing has it been called Sanatan or the great eternal through the ages. It is the only grand expansive umbrella or a superset under which a variety of subsets can flourish for various temperaments or need as the case may be,
The major task before Shankara was negation of shoonyawada which was widespread at that time .
The adhikari of Vedanta is a virtuous student who possesses divine qualities . So needless to say that Shankara did not emphasize it independently , It was presumed .
Isn't there just one Truth? Surely if all these great Enlightened beings are not able to agree on the Truth, then it must mean that the real Truth is beyond even their reach.....I guess only death will reveal the Truth
For me Madhvacharya and Shankaracharya both are correct from their point of View .
While opposing views are always permissable, surely one should maintain a courtesy in discourse.
Swamiji though young - speaking quickly and not remembering we may be not as erudite - gives us such a huge biblio and thoughts to continue our own Search.
Perhaps Swamiji is a little intimidating ... I am quite sure he does not intend that.
His Service is currently to share with those who appreciate his erudition and analyses.
If we have useful contributions they are surely welcome to all. Even if utter disgreement is interesting IF expressed without name-calling and verbal abuse.
I wish him Grace and blessings on his search for enlightenment.
So Brahman and the Universe are one?
By 'Through jnana alone one attains Moksha', Shankaracharya meant Brahma-jnana / Self-realization and not just the path of jnana yoga.
न तु *ब्रह्मविज्ञानव्यतिरेकेण* अन्यन्मोक्षसाधनम् अवगम्यते
No other means of liberation are known except the knowledge of
Brahman.
~ Brihadaranyaka Upanishad Bhasya 1.4.7.
दृश्यते हि *एकत्वविज्ञानाद्* एव अनवगमनिवृत्तिः
We actually see that the knowledge of unity alone dispels ignorance.
~ Ibid. 1.4.10
*Note:* He has used the term 'Brahma-vijnana' which is nothing but immediate realisation or Aparoksha anubhuti as per Shankaracharya.
Sabai k amar sashroddho pronam🙏🙏🙏 ❤❤❤❤
Pranaam Swami Medhananda
Brahman (Supreme being) has infinite dimensions. All aspects are on equal footing and true when you look at the infinite reality from that angle. What is true from one aspect, seem to have contradiction from another angle or aspect, but all are true. God is Satyam, Jnanam, Anantam, Avyayam, Avyaktam. Words fail to describe God beyond a point of their realisation and understanding, be it from Adi Shankaracharya, Ramakrishna Paramahamsa or Swami Vivekananda. No one is superior to other, or a final authority on Brahman. The Brahman may reveal to you as Spacetime, Quantum energy, Pure Maths, Dwaita, Visistadvaita, or Advaita. All are real and all are truths. That is why even Swami Vivekananda appears to contradict at times on what said earlier, but what he said at that moment has to be seen from that context of the subject he was talking.
The talk by Swami Medhananda seem pure academic and confusing. It does more harm than good to Hinduism as it shows that Hinduism is full of fissures which it is not. Didn't Sri Ramakrishna said that one is not eligible to preach unless one is self realised? What authority one has to talk on these subjects except as academic outpourings collected from different books with a feeling from transactional level? Are the thoughts emanating from a 'realised soul'? A soul searching time and good to be silent until that time.
True, without self-realization it's like blind leading blind. Even, I think vijnana can be understood rightly only after Self-realization. I feel the difference between a jivanmukta and a vijnani is not in the realisation but only in the outlook. This is what Swami Vivekananda also taught in one place where he describes about the outlook of an acharya and a jivanmukta, although both have realised that the world (as understood by us) is mithya.
Swamiji is extremely well read and academically disciplined.
Yes, it would be wonderful to be guided by a realised soul.
In the meanwhile we study and learn, while following the advice of prayer and meditation and service.
It is gift to us on the first requirement to have Swamiji inform and explain many points and to unravel some knots.
Please post Q&A of same talk 🙏🙏🙏
As an Advaitin who is not a sanyasi/sanyasin and who is not familiar with the specifics of how they get ordained, it is my assumption that all sanyasis/sanyasins of the Ramakrishna Math are ordained as members of the Puri order of monastics established by Sri Shankaracharya. Now, if I further assume that what was presented in this video is true, then it seems to me that Swami Vivekananda had serious reservations about Sri Shankaracharya’s interpretation and presentation of the vision of the Upanishads. If that was the case, and if Swami Vivekananda felt that these flaws or deficiencies in Shankara’s teachings were detrimental for our pursuit of moksha, I wonder why he chose not to disassociate his monastic order from the Puri order of Shankaracharya. Seems to me that he could have, for instance, chosen to have the monastic order remain unaffiliated. -akin to how the Self-Realization Fellowship operates now-
For non-monastics like me, the choice of the teachings we adopt to further our pursuit of moksha is perhaps the most important decision we make in our life since what we may lose from an inapt choice is immeasurable. I am confident that Swami Vivekananda was aware of the plight of folks like me. Therefore, I am somehow reluctant to believe that he would just choose to be ambivalent about this subject and leave us in the lurch to fend for ourselves. So, I am confused by this discordance.
Love your succinct yet wholesome, kind, thoughtful and truthful repudiation of Medhananda's discourse.
My style would be to simply say, there's nothing of Ramakrishna or Vivekananda in him. I hope his guru's grace will protect him when he falls from his self made perch.
@@Zenzonighte Could it be that this critique of Shankara’s teachings is just Ishvara providing us an opportunity to reflect upon and strengthen our understanding of Shankara’s teachings and, thereby, progress in our moksha quest?
@@rsr9200 Indeed, as you say, this could be Ishvara's way of providing that slight push and motivation to stay true to our paths when we are weary and a bit distracted. 🙏
Have you checked whether shankaracharya mutt has accepted swami vivekananda a disciple of shankaracharya?
Please consult
Sringeri
Puri
Joshi
Dwaraka
Second- you are right ramakrishna math has accepted the sannayasa order as per dasanami. Was this really recommended by sri ramakrishna?
Third they immediately say ramakrishna took sannyasa from totapuri.
Why he took?
Answer - ramakrishna taught totapuri vedanta and other way.
Ramakrishna math is like a sanctuary.
As many paths so many faiths.
All vedanta schools are accepted and upheld as equal. It is choice of all aspirants to choose his/her school and practice under guidance of sri ramakrishna.
There are some monks who are narrow minded and neglect this catholicity of ramakrishna and preach only shankara world negating advaita.
@@regardsk3815 Not sure what you mean when you ask “Have you checked whether shankaracharya mutt has accepted swami vivekananda a disciple of shankaracharya?”. Although there is some dispute as to when Sri Shankaracharya was born, I am reasonably certain that no one disputes that Swami Vivekananda was born centuries after Shankara. That being the case, how is it possible for Swami Vivekananda to have been a disciple of Sri Shankaracharya? Also, I am not aware of Swami Vivekananda claiming that he was a disciple of Sri Shankaracharya in some previous birth. So, the question seems invalid to me.
Whether the decision of Swami Vivekananda to affiliate with Shankara’s dasanami sampradaya had the blessings of Sri Ramakrishna is a question that only Swami Vivekananda, his brother disciples, or Sri Sarada Devi might have known. If Sri Ramakrishna had serious reservation about this, I would imagine that Sri Sarada Devi would have persuaded Swami Vivekananda to abandon this course of action and she would have guided him on an alternate course.
That said, it is my assumption that before any Swami at RK Math takes his vows of sanyasa he has been fully apprised of the teachings of Shankara, the founder of the dasanami monastic lineage he is about to embrace. So, it seems to me that if said Swami felt strongly that Shankara’s teachings were detrimental to his pursuit of moksha, he would be reluctant to affiliate himself with the dasanami sampradaya of Shankara. I am assuming, of course, that the RK Math does not offer their brahmacharis the choice of being a monk affiliated with the Math alone without being initiated into Shankara’s sampradaya. If my assumptions are wrong, then what I say in this para and the next may be ignored.
As I see it, a sanyasi’s embrace of a sampradaya implies his embrace of all the tenets of that sampradaya. So, as a non-monastic, I am surprised when I hear acharyas (teachers) deprecate their own chosen sampradaya. It makes me wonder how they will be able to guide us in making the right choice of teachings if they themselves are unsure or ambivalent about the choice they made.
this should be titled " Swami Medhanandas interpretation of Swami Vivekananadas Vedanta."
Why, Swami Medhananda is doing great research m, what's the problem in that...
@@sumitdutta7043I agree with you.
@radhikaschwartz ... Please don't post nonsense comments.
Pronaams!🙏² Namashkaars to all!🙏
Jai shree Ramakrishna 🙏🙏
Ekam Sat Vipra Bahuda Vadanti ... They all point to SAME and ONE truth . There cannot be different interpretations . Only the words differ .
Hairsplitting on The 4 Yogas and their variations
Prapatti or Saranagati in Bhakti Yoga involves complete surrender to the will of the Lord. It leads to the eradication of one’s false ego. Every human being spends his/her waking state under the delusion or Maya (Beginning-less Ignorance) that he is the Doer (Kartha) and Enjoyer (Bhoktha). To get rid of this ignorance, to eliminate this Vritti/Samskara/Vasana (Inclination or propensity) that got perpetuated in our mind, over many lifetimes, requires enormous effort only because human beings are creatures of habit.
Swami Tyagananda of Ramakrishna order (Boston) once explained that each of the 4 Yogas are like different paths that lead to the same mountain top - ADMK - (1) Action - selfless service to the society or doing one’s duty without attachment to its outcomes (Karma Yoga), (2) Devotion - Complete surrender to the will of the Lord (Bhakti Yoga) (3) Meditation: Cessation of the vagaries of the mind (Raja Yoga) or (4) Knowledge : Acquiring knowledge of the ultimate reality (Paramardhika Satta) which will liberate one’s mind from ignorance.
Chakravarthi Rajagopalachari’s commentary in his prelude to the famous Bhajagovindam song is worth remembering in this context -
“ Adi Shankaracharya wrote a number of Vedantic works for imparting knowledge of
the Self and the Universal Spirit. He also composed a number of hymns to foster
Bhakti in the hearts of men. One of these hymns is the famous Bhaja Govindam.
The way of devotion, is not different from the way of knowledge or Jnana. When
intelligence matures and lodges securely in the mind, it becomes wisdom. When
wisdom is integrated with life and issues out in action, it becomes Bhakti.
Knowledge, when it becomes fully mature is Bhakti. If it does not get transformed
into Bhakti, such knowledge is useless tinsel. To believe that Jnana and
Bhakti, knowledge and devotion are different from each other, is ignorance. If
Sri Adi Shankara himself who drank the ocean of Jnana as easily as one sip’s
water from the palm of one’s hand, sang in his later years, hymns to develop
devotion, it is enough to show that Jnana and Bhakti are one and the same. Sri
Shankara has packed into the Bhaja Govindam song: the substance of all vedanta,
and set the oneness of Jnana and Bhakti to melodious music.”
Cessation of the false ego is the intent behind the 4 Yogas - none of the paths are superior or inferior to the other. Adi Shankara, unlike his teacher’s teacher Gaudapada, was considered Jagadguru (Teacher of the World) only because he could unite the different schools of thought prevailing at that time in India. He didn’t teach that Gnaana Yoga was the only way to get liberated from this unending cycle of birth & death.
Lord Krishna dedicated an entire chapter 12 (20 verses) to Bhakti Yoga and even mentions that it will be the easiest path to attain HIM 🙏
I think these philosophies are derranging my mind, can anyone else relate?
Exactly.
I think we have to hold all ideas lightly. Just have faith that we will know the full truth one day here or hereafter.
Re-arranging in the right order may be a less wrong way to say it. The wisdom of the Upanishads has influenced many great thinkers of the West.
Swami Medhananda looks like Swami Brahmananda
Not in the least ….Swami Brahmananda was quite roly-poly !
*Shankaracharya Gita Bhasya 13.18:*
(Question):-Who is fit to attain this right knowledge ?
(Answer):-He who is devoted to Me, who regards Me-Vasudeva, the Supreme Lord, the Omniscient, the Supreme Guru-as the Self (Soul, Essence) of everything, i.e., he who is possessed (as it were) with the idea that all that he sees or hears or touches is nothing but the Lord, Vasudeva. Thus devoted to Me, and having attained the right knowledge described above, he is fit to attain to My state, i.e., he attains moksha.
How's this different from Vijnana?
Shankara accepts duality within paradigm of illusion. He writes his bhasya or gloss as per your understanding wherever duality concept occurs in gita.
Universe does not exist in reality but exist out of ignorance +Brahman.
To achieve non-duality, one has to remove the ignorance, thus Universe will cease to exist.
Living beings are out of ignorance,
Matter is out of ignorance. Both don't exist in reality.
Liberation as per shankaracharya is to remove the universe. There is no seer, seeing and seen.
Vijnana vedanta- sri ramakrisha states that after removing worldliness, world will remain.
Brahman, living beings and world will remain together as one whole.
This is ramanuja advaita but swami medhananda, does not agree.
This just shows how much he studied ramnuja commentary of Brahma sutra.
"Liberation as per Shankara is to remove the universe"....lol. You just completely ignored concept of Jivanmukti in Advaita. In liberation, there are two types of Jnana that dispel two different aspects of avidya - concealment and projection. When the concealment aspect of Avidya is removed the person becomes a Jeevan mukta for whom the world still continues to exist, and when all pre-accumulated karma of that person are exhausted, the person becomes a bidehamukta, post death.
The so-called Vijnana Vedanta is only for the jivanmukta. If Swami Medhananda's Vijnana has to be ultimately true, then the state of vijnana must exist for the liberated person even after death, which would mean that rebirth doesn't end for that person. If the state of vijana does end at death, how is it the ultimate form of liberation?
@@regardsk3815 Sorry to say, you have lots of misconceptions regarding Advaita. I will write a detailed response later, why it is so.
@@nirjhardas7333 Liberation as per Shankara is to remove the universe"....lol. You just completely ignored the concept of Jivanmukti in Advaita.
What is Jivanmukti as per shankara ? This concept in the shankara philosophy is a self-contradiction-- This is just kept to motivate people to follow shankara's philosophy. I am not commenting about Shankara's Bhakti bhava.This is described in Vivekachudamani------- 426 to 479---- Please go through this in detail.
Still I shall explain to your
Verse- 426Jivanmukti - is free from KarmaVijnana Vedanta-- He does karma
Verse 427Jivanmukti- is free from dualityVijnana Vedanta- Duality is there along with Integral Unity.
Verse 428- 431Jivanmukti-- has forgotten this UniverseVijnana Vedanta- Universe is not forgotten but rather used to remember the Unity
Verse 436Jivanmukti-- devoid dutiesVijnana Vedanta- Serving man as God
Verse 439Jivanmukti-- He does not differentiate Jiva and Brahma and Universe--- Why? He knows Brahman with Upadhi is Jiva and Universe. These do not exist. This is the illumination knowledge one maintains.Vijnana Vedanta- there is no Upadhi-- Brahman + Jiva+ Universe and together as Integral whole as one.
Verse 447Jivanmukti-- Once attain Jiva and Brahman are same-- Karma ceases to exist - There is no dream once you wake up. Experience as dreamt may be there- but it will vanishingVijnana Vedanta-- Nothing is dream here- Only Jivatma who felt separate from whole - realize the integral non-duality of oneness- Like Water, fish and rocks-- Ocean- inseparable.
Verse 448 to 454Jivanmukti-- No least action and meaninglessVijnana vedanta- Jivatma thinks the world is converted from Illusion to mirth.
Verse 460 to 479d---Jivanmukti-- Becomes immovable Though he livesVijnana vedanta-- Jivatma experiences Brahman in difference with Integral Unvity- Like fish and water - both are not same- but eternally inseparable.
Coming to Jivanmukti concept in Advaita Vedanta-- Is it logical according to their own Philosophical Exposition- Brahma Satyam- Jagat Mithya - Jivo Brahmaiva na paraha:
What is the meaning of Jivan mukti?Jivan Mukta states that it is achieved after realization-- what is the realization according to Shankara ? Jagat is Mithya-- This mitya as be removed-False snake has to be removed by the Guru’s wording that “ this is not a snake but rope”.
According to Realization of That tvam Asi-- Jivatma has to give up its body, mind concept and Paramatma has to give up its Universal concept- What result is one Consciousness--- Non-dual Brahman-- No second thing.
This is achieved by a Jivan Mukta------------You are saying Prarabdha Karma is still left ? This prarabdha karma is for Jivatma or Brahman?You cannot say Jivatma because-- Jivatma itself is a result of Illusion like God.
Further issues--What is the meaning of this term?
1. the Cessation of the body while embodied
2. the Cessation of the appearance of the body
3. the Cessation of the activities depending on the body
4. the cessation of the merits and demerits accruing from the function of the body etc
5. the cessation of the pleasure and paid cause by it
6. the cessation of something else.
Please chose from above choice or advise if you have any other apart from Prarabda karma.
@@durga.prasad please do write.
Let me read your understanding.
Please write
Nature of Brahman
Nature of individual soul
Nature of matter
It's relationship
How many realities are there?
What is attributeless?
How this appearance occur?
What is meant by adhyasa?
How to remove it?
Removing knowledge comes from where?
Where is this adhyasa?
Advaita by definition is integral ! How can Advaita be non-integral ?
Logical fallacy when one says nirguna [ as per shankaracharya] and saguna [ as per ramanuja] on Brahman. Swami here is taking them as opposites.
How?
Answer. Nature of Brahman in vedanta have no parts and changes. This is strictly maintained by all vedanta schools.
If one says Brahman is both nirguna and saguna-
Question
This dual opposite characters are nature of Brahman or quality of Brahma?.
Answer- if you say it is nature of Brahman.
Brahman will be have parts. This is unacceptable. This is something like sun is half heat and half cold. No where such a mistake is made by nature.
If you say these opposites are attributes, then Brahman is qualified.
Eg sun is always emitting heat rays but due to cloudy sometime we feel cool though sun is up.
Pranam maharaj,
This discourse is very thought provoking, well researched work, well structured, resulting in high impact on the devotees of Sree Ramakrishna Ashrama.
Without listening to your discourse I feel ( devotees) my lunch / dinner is incomplete .
🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏. Anantha Namaskaras to GURUMAHARAJ for providing swamiji’s like you to His devotees.
🙏💐🙏💐
🙏🙏🙏🙏
Viveka had escaped Swami Vivekananda when he says Shankara was a mere intellectual. Has SV even read works of Shankara apart from his Brahma sootra. So much compassion ex Bhavani ashtakam, guru ashtakam, nadi stotram, narmada, ganga , Shivanandha lahari, wherein he becomes so humble and meek and heart melting love to Ishwara as various deities.
2) Who are we to have compassion Rk said, but SV says Shankara didn't have compassion, but these avatars had compassion!! What a blaring contradiction
3) Rk said when asked what is that one practice to be done "- brohmo sotyom jogon miththo " and then he fell silent.
4) Whether part of whole or servant of god, Shankara in his Sadhana panchakam in the second line of the first verse says "taduitam karma svanushteeyataam, teneshasya vidheeyataam apachitih" Do whatever duties are ordained to you according to those scriptures , and do it with a sense of doing worship to God(Isha)
Bhagavad geeta says the same -" sve sve karmani abhiratah samsiddhim labhate narah" just doing ones own duties of life one reached fulfilment.
No need for charity if everyone just did their injucted duties where charity and daana was the duty of a king /politician not spiritual organisations to run hospitals /schools / orphanages.. These are duties and responsiblities of a king /political entity. If they did their job well why wud RK mission need to do it. A spiritual organisations duty is to teach and propagate their teaching not to do service of sick patients.
This Shankara understood very well...
5) If soul is a part of god does it follow that it must surrender or act as a servant? Why should it? Does the finger surrender to hair? Does finger surrender to the body? Why should it? Wouldn't that mean a part of god is surrendering to a larger part of god? Does that mean the finger is less important than the hand?
6) jnana as in the experience and wisdom of the unity of reality ,is what liberates finally. Otherwise why would RK need to be taught by his guru Totapuri , if his vijanana love of personal god was sufficient and on same level as advaita.
Obviously there is a need fulfilled by jnana which is not done by karma or bhakti. Hence jnana yoga is privileged by Shankara.
Kabir also said "Nirguna galiyaan" song wherein he said only if we walked the nirguna path will "aavaagamana mit jaay" coming and going as in birth and death will be erased.
Sir, before we discuss on the other points, I wanted to understand that why do followers of Shankaracharya in general maintain that only jnana yoga alone can lead to moksha, while the scriptures support all the four ways?
For instance, Lord Krishna says in Gita:
ध्यानेनात्मनि पश्यन्ति केचिदात्मानमात्मना । अन्ये सांख्येन योगेन कर्मयोगेन चापरे ।
Some by meditation behold the Self in the self by the self, others by the Yoga of knowledge, and still others by the Yoga of action.
- Bhagavad Gita, 13.25
Shankaracharya too writes in his introduction to the above verse:
अत्र आत्मदर्शने उपायविकल्पाः इमे ध्यानादयः उच्यन्ते
Here are being presented these meditation etc. which are the alternative means for the realization of the Self.
Lord Shiva says in Ishvara Gita:
ध्यानेन मां प्रपश्यन्ति केचिज्ज्ञानेन चापरे । अपरे भक्तियोगेन कर्मयोगेन चापरे ।
Some behold me through meditation, some through knowledge and a few others through devotion, and other people by the path of action.
- Ishvara Gita 4.24
and Devi says to Himavanta in Kurma Purana:
ध्यानेन कर्मयोगेन भक्त्या ज्ञानेन चैव हि । प्राप्याहं ते गिरिश्रेष्ठ नान्यथा कर्मकोटिभिः ॥
गिरिश्रेष्ठ! मैं ध्यान, कर्मयोग, भक्ति तथा ज्ञानके द्वारा ही तुम्हारे लिये प्राप्य हूँ, दूसरे करोड़ों कर्मोंके द्वारा मुझे प्राप्त नहीं किया जा सकता।
- Kurma Purana, Purva Bhaga, 11.264
Isn't it a mistake to equate karma with the path of karma-yoga?
@@durga.prasad thanks for ur response.
1) Why only jnana?
Jnaana is considered the final step towards Moksha. Karma and bhakti are preparatory and equally important and helpful.
यज् ज्ञात्वा न पुनर् मोहम् एवं यास्यसि पाण्डव ।
येन भूतान्यशेषेण द्रक्ष्यस्यात्मन्यथो मयि ।।
4.35 gita.
Only by knowledge ignorance is removed . that knowledge is " seeing" all beings in self and thence in me. This is jnana.
7.17 of all of them who seek me, the Jnani is best because he is verily me.
But I agree the geeta eulogises bhakta as the greatest in one chapter , a yogi in another, a karmin in another , a jnanin in another..
But the final leap in the journey to attaining Brahman and destroying the cycle of birth and death for the soul is through impersonal jnana- 13.30,
The jnana /wisdom to see unity in all is Sattvika jnana -18.20 and to see things as separate and different(bhedas) is Rajasika 18.21 and to have no philosophy and just be engaged in some action of body /identified with body is tamasika.
2) Karma and karma yoga-
It is clear- to do ones ordained duties (accoeding to their capabilities ,influences at birth and circumstances ) in the spirit of worship of Ishwara, not attaching to results or expecting anything in return, without feeling elated or dejected in success and failures of those actions, is Karma yoga which leads to Naishkarmya siddhi 18.49.
Finally after achieving this to move towards Brahman 18.50 , one must do dhyana 18.51-53 letting go of ego, then one gets equanimity and bhakti 18.54 , then the bhakti finally KNOWS "me" in reality and as I am. Immediately he abides in me.(Brahman)
To those who love me incessantly, I provide the final Buddhiyoga(jnana) so that they can come to me. I destroy their darkness of ignorance with the light of knowledge. 10.10,10.11
So it is clear the sequence Even Shri Krishna says towards Moksha.
Hence the privilege that Shankara gives to Jnana.
Just as on the journey to an old home of ours, we take car, bus, then walk, then eat food along the way, etc but are always aware and cautious of the key which open the door. Becoz without that the journey is a waste and fruitless. Although each of the other aspects of travel also contributed such as car, food, walking, etc... equally..
So in that sense , naturally we privilege the key. Only in that sense similarly , Shankara privileges jnana
@@sudarshanravi1565
//Finally after achieving this to move towards Brahman 18.50, one must do dhyana 18.51-53 letting go of ego, then one gets equanimity and bhakti 18.54, then the bhakti finally KNOWS "me" in reality and as I am. Immediately he abides in me.(Brahman)...//
That's one way, however, it further continues with the karma yoga too...
56. Doing all actions always, taking refuge in Me, by My Grace he obtains the eternal, indestructible state or abode.
57. Mentally renouncing all actions in Me, having Me as the highest goal, resorting to the Yoga of discrimination do thou ever fix thy mind on Me.
58. Fixing thy mind on Me, thou shalt by My Grace overcome all obstacles; but if from egoism thou wilt not hear Me, thou shalt perish.
So, a Karma-yogi too attains Self-knowledge through the grace of Ishvara.
In that case, karma yoga too should be a valid path, just like the path of vichara, as both culminates in Self-knowledge. The path of vichara requires a mind that is prepared, that is fine. But, this doesn't mean that the other yogas are inferior or only act as preparatory disciplines, although they can be very helpful, undoubtedly for one following the path of vichara. However, at the final perfection in any of the 4 yogas, the aspirant attains Self-knowledge and through that liberation. I don't think there is any contradiction in this.
I would like to hear your views too.
Thanks.
@@durga.prasad wonderful rebuttal.
Can u explain why then 10.10, 13.30 , 18.20, 7.17?
And the famous- na hi jnaanena sadrssham pavitram
@@sudarshanravi1565 All the four yogas culminates in Self-knowledge. So, I don't think there is any contradiction in this regard.
Maybe one day we will be able to just eating the mango, and be happy...
Mind won't allow it
First of all we need to understand that the awakening process, that one might go through, is not a fail safe thing that grants you knowledge and infallibility.
Quite the contrary, the process of awakening is not an aquisition but a letting go. There is no knowledge in it and if you are seduced by the prospect of "discovering the truth" then you are already set yourself up for and deceived yourself.
Letting go - makes empty space in your mind and consolidates the wholeness, of the piece of mind that you are "sovereign" of.
Letting go trough and through leaves you COMPLETELY empty. In that state your piece of mind is whole. You are at peace. There is no substituting of ignorance for knowledge.
There is only letting go.
If I understand that I do not know who I am, how can I "see Brahman" in everything?
To perceive oneself as limited is to "not know who you are"
Why is there such a confusion in advaita then?
However this confusion is easily resolved.
If you are not whole then you cannot "grasp" wholeness.
It is not Brahman you must see, it is Atman.
You are Atman, we all are.
If you look out and only see what is whithin. Then you see wholly.
See YOURSELF in everything. Then you wont attack yourself, wouldnt you?
We will all see Brahman togheder, when our Atman is one, whole. Right now it is in a state of separation.
Brahman is in a state of pemanent Wholeness. He does not know anything about limits. For a mind to know a limit, it must split itself in parts.
It is very irresponsible that in order of legitimizing limits we project the responsibility on to Brahman and say things like "Its Brahman's dream, fantasy, play, etc"
It is the most basic error that the whole advaita (current one) is miopic to.
Do not legitimize limits - protect oneness.
Shravana, Manana, Nidhidhyasana on to the process of letting go. It is also called forgiveness, surrender, renunciation.
To "let go of" one needs also understand how did he "aquire".
If the mechanics of aquisition are understand then one can reverse them and let go.
Ask yourself if the focus of your mind is on a limit or on limitlessness.
The answer to that cuestion is by default: your mind is thinking parcially, in a limited way.
To know wholeness the mind must be one/whole itself.
At this moment our mind is feverishly grasping at an identity. Any identity.
Our mind is under impression that in abcence of identity, it seases to exist as well.
However it is not the goal to dump everything from the mind in one go, that would be indeed very traumatic to the mind.
Forgiveness can be applied at ones own pace.
That is why we must understand how forgiveness wors, apply it relevantly on all age groups.
If humanity is to survive, it is by entering into an age of forgiveness.
Utterly divisive for a philosophy based on oneness XD
The Reality is nondual, One but the philosophies are many in number.
Why did brahman become the world ? Nobody answers it ....
@Vedanta Explained this escape route all of us know ,....
Same thing happened to me yesterday. I was thinking about an eggplant and then I thought "Why have my mind become an eggplant?" Fortunately it reversed back to being just a mind and everything is fine since then...
@@srsr9513its no escape route its the best possible unbaised answer
Please consider the following points.
1. Forget about the past Shankaracharya. Look into the teachings of today's Shankara Mutts. They are teaching the absurd Birth based exclusivity and superior birth !! Refer:- Govardhan Mutt, Puri.
2. These lectures of Shankara Mutts are actually creating ignorant people who bring disrepute to our religion and also leading to societal problems.
3. I have not researched much on Ramana Maharshi. But, I have heard here and there that even he was NOT revolutionary enough to bring down the nonsense of Birth based caste system that is being professed.
4. Look into the Life of Narayan Guru. Both Spiritual and revolutionizing.
5. Am posting here , Swami Vivekananda's Criticism from " Complete Works Volume 7 " - Chapter " Conversations and Dialogues ". Condemns Shankaracharya's commentary on Brahma sutras and casteist reference to Vidura .
This is what happens when random people enter the order and become sanyasi.
Random* 😂
Really
And some other random people judge it randomly.
A lot of this is nonsensical and so over complicated.
Thanks for being honest.
It depends on who is sensing.
@@indbap1You're so absolutely right.
It's amazing how religious folks can complicate something that is so simple. I guess everyone has a need to fill their time here.
What is being complicated here
Why don't you enlighten us what it is so complicated?
@@unified2002 Really? You don't see this? All they are talking about is one simple thing. Present moment awareness. Reality is what it is. No need for all the conceptualization.
@@wthomas5697 present moment is just a conditioned interpretation of our perception generally based on the ego.
@@AbhishekKumar-sz9fl Direct perception via the sensory apparatus has nothing to do with ego.