The great Adi Shankaracharya single-handedly connected holy spots of India, 12 Jyotirlingas, 18 Shakti peeths and 4 Vishnu Dhaams to create pilgrim routes that defined India as a single land. He travelled from Kerala to Kashmir and from Puri to Dwarka, from Karnataka to Uttarakhand. He was the first to unite the whole India and revive the lost glory of Sanatan Dharma in the 8th century. Shankaracharya was not only an ivory tower philosopher, he was a political sage, engaging with and responding to the historical context of his time. Through philosophy, poetry and pilgrimage he attempted to bind the sub-continent of India that was constantly referred to in Hindu, Buddhist & Jains holy texts/scriptures as well as in the Vedic ritual of Sankalpa as Jhambu dvipa, the continent of Jambhul tree and Bharat - Varsha-the land of Bharata Kings. All this he achieved before the age of 32! I consider him as an ansh avatar of Bhagwan Shiv. Thank you Swami ji for the wonderful session!
I have a class. .. slam .. :) .. Swami Sarvapriananda is such a spiritual creature and yet such a everyday god worldly man we can relate to, in a sense that he is not divorced from the mindset of the everyday people "givas": though his understanding is from heaven and eternity and his asanga for wordily things is most obvious. Yet his feet are firmly on the ground and he can see the world through our eyes, thus he is so competent to point us to non-objective, eternal presence of being, the awareness. His existence as a teacher is the real grace of GOD.
The greatest gift of India to the world: Vedanta. Vedanta is the hope for all mankind. It is the Deathless Nectar for all. Whoever tastes it, will never experience Death.
Even Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu got Sanyas from his Guru Swami Keshava Bharati Maharaj . His name was Swami Krishna Chaitanya Bharati Maharaj. Jay Adi Shankaracharya Acharyapada ( the Champion of the Champions ).
॥जय श्रीरामकृष्ण|| 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻 Namaskar Swami Sarvapriyanandaji Maharaj 🙏🏻 Thank you Advaita Academy for sharing this video 🌹 Today, I listened to Swamiji’s this talk again. Very informative, serene & blissful discourse by Swamiji as always 🙏🏻
One more excellent explanation by Swamiji !!! The way Swamiji clarifies Advaita philosophy, it eye opening experience always. I have heard his video 'The Two Birds', which is par excellence. Unfortunately they have removed it from U Tube now.
Thanks Lady, you made a wonderful utilisation of time of this great Swami ji .... Absolutely fabulous presentation and what an awesome mind this Swami ji possess......
Namaste The upanishads which are a part of Vedas declare that there is only One and to realize this Oneness of all life is the ultimate purpose of life. Every moment we breath, nature reminds us of this truth as each incoming breath resonates to So meaning He and outgoing breath to Ham meaning I (The Sanskrit words are split as Sah and Aham and its conjuction is Soham) Every time we breath , we can tune ourselves to this ultimate reality of Oneness by remembering Soham. Thanks.
Teaching as story telling. If this is natural for anyone it should be your obligation to society to become a teacher. This lost art is making a come back!
Can anyone recommend an advaita monastery or organization that accepts men in their mid 30’s? I have an associates degree but The RamaKrishna Order requires a masters degree if your older than 35, which I am. I have the upmost respect for monastics. They are pursuing the goal of life 🙏
Super Brilliant! Loved listening to this. Now I wanna take sanyasa and leave my family and be on the path of God. Just tired of this daily bullshit from wife, made a big mistake in life getting married.
Chill out bro .. life is so beautiful.. enjoy the greatness of married life.. spend good time with your kids ... its just my suggestions .. stay happy as always
It was said that Adi Shankara died at such a young age at either 32 or 35 years of age. Many people have asked if he's such a great sage, why did he die so young? Hopefully, someone can explain.
Swamiji ,That was brilliant. As a student of philosophy ,I can only say that I dare not have believed to have understood Vedanta in these last two years. Thanks for reminding that with your clarity on Sankara. May I ask you if you would ,atleast strictly academically speaking, agree that the Madhyamik Shunyavadin school of Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta are in a subtle resonance of the same basic metaphysical thought? I remember reading how Gaudapada himself has similar views. Sankara does criticise Shunyavada ,but seemingly not for what it is. Hopefully you would see this. Again ,Thank You. Great lectures. Do speak more on Swami Vivekananda too. After Swamiji ,I like your exposition of Vedanta the most.
It seems Sankara did borrow some techniques of reasoning from the schools of Buddhism. Philosophically speaking, Sankara and Nagarjuna tries to convey the same thing but with a subtle difference.
Ask those Richard Dockins and other people come to Bharat , I will make sure that theirs very fundamental will become a question. They have faced only Abrahmic relegion having an Aasmani kitab, heavenly book , by some damn God. If he will come to Bharat , he will experience what the wisdom is , what the buddhi and Viveka is. Here we don't have any damn God sitting up there. Don't worry Swamiji to face such people we don't require the wisdom of Vedanta even they won't be able to pass on the parameter of Nyaya.
Thank You Swamiji! The only thing i thought: All War IS hidden in language indeed! The question: WHAT IS consciousness? , differs from the question WHO IS Consiousness? Because objectivity excists only, as with Yang and Yin, by subjectivity! Both are illusion? Or is the "WHAT"-question' a false one? Namaste.
Could anyone comment on 2 things I have heard about Shankara. One is that he was an incarnation of Shiva. The other is that the last words he spoke to his disciples was, 'You intellectual fools, just surrender to Govinda.'
And when he was in the Kashi he found a very aged man reciting again and again the rules of Vyakarana(grammar), by seeing this incident he sang Bhaja Govindam Bhaja Govindam Govindam Bhaje Mudha Mathe which means Sing the names of Govinda you fool. But still for him Brahmajnana was the highest achievement in spirituality. But Advaita Sadhana was only meant for the Sanyasis at that time and the old man was not a Sanyasi, so he told him to do bhakti instead of parroting the rules of grammar at this very old age.......
Once the core of atheists realise the idea of Advaita they would certainly not argue. The volume of the video increased would be fulfilling. Nevertheless, very enlightening programme. More, if possible.
"It doesn't reject it, but it supersedes it." This is a key understanding stressed by Swami ji on Shankara's perceived rejection of Patanjali's Yoga philosophy. I say "perceived" because, there are plenty of neo-Vedantins/neo-Hindus in the West (Rajiv Malhotra takes on Prof. Rambachan in his seminal book, "Indra's Net" on this specific topic), who could be termed as "mischief scholars," who are "using Shankara to shoot down Vivekananda," as Rajiv ji puts it in his book. There is a very sinister goal these "scholars" have: 1. to create 'bhedha' among Hindus and 2. to lower Swami Vivekananda's legitimacy as one of the great icons of Hindu dharma. This is especially taking traction in the recent times because SV is celebrated in India by Hindus as a great Yogi, an Advaitin, and as a man with great kshAtra spirit, post-2014, as India witnessed rise in Hindu consciousness. So, these tricksters will use anything they can find to delegitimize Hindu icons, saints, create division between various sampradayas/philosophical traditions... This is a very complex issue. But I like Swami ji very wisely refuting the "Shankara rejected Yoga" theory.
I have read that Swamiji told Josephine MacLeod that he previously took birth as Shankaracharya. Is this accurate? ( My understanding is: Saptarishi Nara> Arjuna> Shankaracharya> Vivekananda. Do I have that right?).
Sir can you say when shankara charya born, many places it is written that he born in 8th century AD, but according to dwaraka pith he was born in 5th century. What is more acceptable?
The standard well used and popular Shankara-Gita-Bhashya English translation is by Swami Gambhirananda of Ramakrishna Math and it is an Advaita Ashrama Publication easily available in well-known spiritual bookshops in India.
Perhaps you might already be aware, but it's recommended to go for Prakaran Granthas of Adi Shankaracharya before Prasthan Trayi. Please ignore the noise in case you already have covered the same.
Jagadguru Adi Shankaracharya was born in Kalady during the period 509 BC. He established four Amnaya peets and Kanchi Peet 2500 years ago in BC. The Puri, Dwaraka, Badari, Kudali-Shringeri, Kanchi Peets have details of their Guru Shishya parampara right from 2500 years ago with names of Swamijis and their period of Samadhi. The period of SRI Govinda Bhagavad padacharya, Kumarila Bhatta, King Sudhanva copper inscription, Nepal Kings Vamsavali, Scientific examination of the soil flowing near the house of Adi Shankara, Jaina Vijayam sacred book of Jain's also confirms that Adi Shankara period is over 2500 years ago during 509 BC. The western historians and few groups intentionally distorted history to show Adi Shankara was born during 788 AD. Had Adi Shankara was alive in 788 AD he would have even challenged Christianity which first came to Kerala much before.
@@Radheshyam-uh6qg No. Chit and chittam are different. Sat -chit -ananda. Chit is consciousness but chittam is only one part of mind where all our impressions recorded when doing anything (manasa -vacha -karmana ). Mind has four parts mind, intellect, chittam, Ahamkar (ego). Chit is consciousness beyond all parts of mind.
the ultimate reality is brahman of the nature of sat chit aananda, everything else including the world, seen and unseen that is made up of naama/ roopa is superimposed on that one reality
I'm just a retired janitor and "yogic flyer" (TM-Sidha®) from F-land, so everything I say, otta be taken with a huge grain of salt. 😵💫 It seems to be controversial whether Shankara actually is the author of yoga-suutra-vivaraNa (subcommentary on Vyaasa-bhaaSya), or whatever it's called. Be it as may, Shankara seems to have been an accomplished yogii, because, when challenged by Mandana's(?) wife to a dialogue on Kusumaastra-shaastra, He performed cittasya parashariiraavesha into a deceased king's mortal coil to spend a month in the king's harem for gaining knowledge and experience on kaama-suutra stuff. That at least according to Maadhava-vidyaaraNya's Shankara-dig-vijaya. Sutra III.38 बन्धकारणशैथिल्यात्प्रचारसंवेदनाच्च चित्तस्य परशरीरावेशः॥३८॥ badnha-kāraṇa-śaithilyāt pracāra-saṁvedanācca cittasya paraśarīrāveśaḥ ॥38॥ [HA]: When the Cause Of Bondage Gets Weakend And The Movements Of The Mind Are Known, The Mind Can Get Into Another Body. [IT]: (39): The mind can enter another’s body on relaxation of the cause of bondage and from knowledge of passages. [VH]: By relatxation of the cause of the relationship (to the body), and the experience of going forth, citta’s entry into another body. [BM]: From loosening the fetters of bondage to the body and from awareness of the body’s fluidity, one’s thought can enter into the body of another. [SS]: (39): By loosening the cause [of the bondage of the mind to the body] and by knowledge of the procedure of the mind-stuff’s functioning, entering another’s body is accomplished. [SP]: When the bonds of the mind caused by karma have been loosened, the yogi can enter into the body of another by knowledge of the operation of its nervecurrents.
Namaste ...Dear Everyone, Thought you might like this brief quatrain of Mystic ONEness Homage to Hakuin How brilliant the full moon This very moment ONEness Anywhere Paradise Everyone Awake In The Unity of Spirit Charles Mugleston Omar Khayyam Theatre Company
Who is aware of the mind, of the functioning of the mind? What we call mental analysis is nothing but thoughts in our mind. Mind is nothing but a bundle of thoughts! You are aware of your mind...so you can't be mind...thus mind is an object in consciousness...
He is giving a speech to an international audience and he is communicating that this is not a good time for interruption. Have you listened to the full speech. It is brilliant, very informative and some real gems. So instead of raising stupid and moronic objections, listen to the content.
@@sundarrajan1185 shut up useless fellow. Do you think i dont know its informative and awesome. When he is speaking about non dualism and at the same time angry with other person makes no sense at all. I need an answer for his impulsive behaviour. Period.
I am quite certain that he was not angry and didn’t shutdown the door angrily. In most of these houses in Manhattan, the doors have a auto-closing spring mechanism, that makes a loud sound while closing. Because of that loud sound, it appeared as if he slammed the door.
As per my reading of various incidents on Shankaracharya's life it seems he was inconsistent in his views. For example, let's talk about his doctrine and what he actually practiced, 1. He opines that rituals which includes yagnas or any other rituals are not as important as compared to seeking gnana. But at the same time, he himself practiced various rituals such as installing of vigraha of various dieties/yantras and performing of poojas till the end of his life. The same rituals and pooja to vigrahas on a daily basis continue till date in his peeths and mutts. He was against Mimamsa philosophy as it was only concerned with vedic rituals but Shankara too did the same and so does his followers till now in Sringeri. 2. He propounded in his doctrine about Nirguna form of God/Brahman but in reality followed saguna form of worship wherein he venerated and composed stotras attributing to various deities like Shiva, Vishnu, Shakthi and so on. If he truly believed in 'Aham Brahmasmi', then he wouldn't relied on venerating any form of deities nor writing hymns praising those deities. 3. Only Vedas are thought to be authorless and perfect as per Sanatana dharma, whereas the rest like Upanishads, Puranas were authored by men, so holding Upanishads in same weight as the Vedas is wrong, as Upanishads are not considered as authorless, and an author however great is prone to mistakes. In the lifetime of Shankaracharya, there are supposed to have been many miraculous incidents including showering of gold coins by Goddess Lakshmu after he recited Kanakadhara storam; Similarly his encounter with Lord Shiva; Also in his praises in various stotrams he says Lord Subramanya is the son of Lord Shiva and Goddess Parvati etc., so don't these incidents in his life contradict his doctrine of Advaitha? Were these his illusions or incorrectly mentioned in his biography by Sringeri mutt? Can anyone refute the above points? I will comeback with more points on why I consider Shankaracharya to be inconsistent in teaching and practicing.
First - Advaita Philosophy doesn’t say God is one. It says we are no different from Gods. God is a knowledge created by the Consciousness. Shiva, Parvati all are different construct but they are all same. Same with the universal consciousness. Therefore there is no problem if you and I show devotion to different gods - as long as we know that they are all same. And we are that. Second - based on what logic can you say that Vedas are only authentic and not the upanishads? Just because Vedas do not have a writers’ name does not make them authentic and only texts for the Hindus. Similarly just because Upanishadas were written by some rhishis do not make them any less important
@@armitra Thanks for your time in answering the questions. Please note, I have great regard for Sri Adi Shankaracharya for uniting different sets of people of various sects under the umbrella of 'Sanatana Dharma' and for this cause alone my deepest respects go to him. I have severe differences with his philosophy though but that doesn't diminish his status in my eyes. 1. In my humble view, "Advaita Vedanta" expounded by Shankara is just a word gymnastics to explain the concept of Brahman. He says all is Brahman and it is not realized due to 'avidya'/ignorance but my question is the base of it all, if you have expounded a theory then you should live by example else it is all good in theory only. For example, we say Lord Rama was a "Satyamoorthy" (symbol of truth) because he lived all his life with those values and never forsake truth even in dire circumstances. That is living life by an example. Whereas in Shankara's case he expounded on the lofty concepts of Brahman but failed to live up to it. Will give several examples on why he failed to live by the philosophy he preached: 1. It is no good in using complex word gymanstics and all but when you are in dire need, you abandon all that and simply pray to an external entity, for example: Shankara praying to Sri Maha Lakshmi for helping the poor woman who failed to offer proper 'Bhiksha' to him when he was going around for asking for Bhiksha. So, Shankara overcome by great compassion composed the fine stotram named as 'Kanakadhara Stotram' extempore and it resulted in the darshan of Sri Maha Lakshmi and the poor woman's house was showered with golden gooseberries (this incident is embedded in Shankara's biography and authentic as per Sringeri Peetha); 2. Another incident which shows that Shankara did not live by the ideals which he preached, for example Shankara was averse to rituals (thereby discarding the Mimamsa philosophy) but when it came to his own mother, he was concerned with performing of the final rites. Similarly, the numerous Sri Yantraa/rituals associated with it and all are started by him and which still continue at various peetha/mutts established by him and disciples. So, these are few examples of contradiction in his actual life and theoretical concepts which he expounded. 3. Another incident is his encounter with Lord Shiva in the form of Chandala, wherein Lord Shiva pulls Shankara making him realize that his lofty concepts of Brahman being everywhere and in everyone is not being followed in real life and Shankara was embarrassed when he was given real life lesson by Lord Shiva. So, all the above incidents are clearly at odds with what Shankara preached and what he practiced/encountered in his life. Advaitha Vedanta (implicit atheism) is not exactly a revolutionary concept of Shankara, it is highly influenced from the Buddhistic pattern of thinking, only difference in them being the existence of soul (in Advaitha Vedanta) and non-existence of the same in Buddhism. Finally, to reiterate I have great respect for Shankara's act of bringing different people under one umbrella and making them live harmoniously but don't accept his philosophy at all because he himself did not live up to it in his life which can be gauged by any neutral person by reading the above incidents.
@@critical_analysisyour whole talk shows you neither have understood advaita nor you have read it even. .. Advaita has two levels. It's upper level is generally seen as only part of it. No wrong. In its lower level it accepts the dualistic nature of samasara Or world where are differences and difference of God and individual soul concept. So advaita teaches that the lower level is not wrong if you understand that the uooer level is the prime one. But your journey must be through dualistic nature as you are living in a dualistic world and in this world you have identities of many. So., to teach people the right path shnkara preached stotram of different Deities as only means to untimely achieve the non dual knowledge. In advaita the lower level is actually a meditation activity of well being of mind and life here. 😊
You can't find one atheist in the whole world.. an atheist shall take absolute responsibility to for everything in the universe. That is difficult. So called atheist conveniently accept certain things and abuse other things. That is not atheist concept..
poorva sharma So, what’s wrong with that. There are militant religious fanatics too. In Tamil Nadu , the fake rationalist Periyar gangs have been militant
@Truth Seeker .....does one need to care about philosophers or scientists....is it not more than sufficient if one looks into himself or herself...rather deeply ...logic is superficial..
@@ravisrao3816 its possible if u r ramana maharishi...given the way we are, as u so aptly put it with petty closed minds and puny logic...its sensible to take advice and help....
16 year old Shankaracharya was something else 🔥🔥🔥
@38:00 The upanishads are so significant that our history should be dated before Upanishads and after Upanishads. Excellent!
The great Adi Shankaracharya single-handedly connected holy spots of India, 12 Jyotirlingas, 18 Shakti peeths and 4 Vishnu Dhaams to create pilgrim routes that defined India as a single land. He travelled from Kerala to Kashmir and from Puri to Dwarka, from Karnataka to Uttarakhand. He was the first to unite the whole India and revive the lost glory of Sanatan Dharma in the 8th century.
Shankaracharya was not only an ivory tower philosopher, he was a political sage, engaging with and responding to the historical context of his time. Through philosophy, poetry and pilgrimage he attempted to bind the sub-continent of India that was constantly referred to in Hindu, Buddhist & Jains holy texts/scriptures as well as in the Vedic ritual of Sankalpa as Jhambu dvipa, the continent of Jambhul tree and Bharat - Varsha-the land of Bharata Kings. All this he achieved before the age of 32!
I consider him as an ansh avatar of Bhagwan Shiv.
Thank you Swami ji for the wonderful session!
I have a class. .. slam .. :) .. Swami Sarvapriananda is such a spiritual creature and yet such a everyday god worldly man we can relate to, in a sense that he is not divorced from the mindset of the everyday people "givas": though his understanding is from heaven and eternity and his asanga for wordily things is most obvious. Yet his feet are firmly on the ground and he can see the world through our eyes, thus he is so competent to point us to non-objective, eternal presence of being, the awareness. His existence as a teacher is the real grace of GOD.
The greatest gift of India to the world: Vedanta. Vedanta is the hope for all mankind. It is the Deathless Nectar for all. Whoever tastes it, will never experience Death.
Learning nondualism from various Swami Sarvapriyananda lectures over the passed few months has helped me so much. Thank you Swami-ji.
Then read the works of ramana Maharishi.
You can try learning to see the duality also. One is knowledge, so other becomes ignorance.
Swami Sarvapriyananda Ji is a ocean of knowledge and wisdom. 🙏🏽
I am truly humbled by the truth & attraction of Vedanta & knowledge that you share. Lots to ponder on. Thank you.
Even Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu got Sanyas from his Guru Swami Keshava Bharati Maharaj . His name was Swami Krishna Chaitanya Bharati Maharaj. Jay Adi Shankaracharya Acharyapada ( the Champion of the Champions ).
As always excellent presentation Swamiji, every lecture of yours is eye opener to dig deep into Philosophy.!!!!!
শত কোটি প্রণাম স্বামীজিকে........ আমার দিন শুরু ও শেষ হয় আপনার কথা শুনে.......
॥जय श्रीरामकृष्ण||
🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
Namaskar Swami Sarvapriyanandaji Maharaj 🙏🏻
Thank you Advaita Academy for sharing this video 🌹
Today, I listened to Swamiji’s this talk again.
Very informative, serene & blissful discourse by Swamiji as always 🙏🏻
Adi Shankracharya
I bow to his teachings.
Thanks to your organization for sharing his profound philosophy.
Worthy 🕉 Gen21.19 mathew12.42 Revalation4.7 🕉 God bless you Jesus with all liveing creachers worthy of worship 🕉
One more excellent explanation by Swamiji !!!
The way Swamiji clarifies Advaita philosophy, it eye opening experience always.
I have heard his video 'The Two Birds', which is par excellence. Unfortunately they have removed it from U Tube now.
Thanks for organizing this talk.
We would like to have more of Swami Sarvapriyananda ji during this oneness event.
Thanks again to the organisers :)
Wonderful exposition on the life and work of Adi Shankara! Thank you so much Swami!!
Thanks Lady, you made a wonderful utilisation of time of this great Swami ji .... Absolutely fabulous presentation and what an awesome mind this Swami ji possess......
Koti koti Pranam swamiji
😄... Puri sabji ke sath kha gaya.... Nice humorous start to conversion.....
Jai Sri Ramakrishna
Nice analysis, thanks, pronnam Swamiji.
People with petty minds should look into their credentials to sttend SATSANGS of a great teacher like Swamiji.
Admire you Guruji. You displayed absolute calmness despite the interruption at 23.10
Pranam Swamiji 🙏🏻
Namaste
The upanishads which are a part of Vedas declare that there is only One and to realize this Oneness of all life is the ultimate purpose of life.
Every moment we breath, nature reminds us of this truth as each incoming breath resonates to So meaning He and outgoing breath to Ham meaning I (The Sanskrit words are split as Sah and Aham and its conjuction is Soham)
Every time we breath , we can tune ourselves to this ultimate reality of Oneness by remembering Soham.
Thanks.
What a CV.. Very attractive
Thank you 🙏 guruji
Jai gurudev ji 🙏
Music to my ears... 🎼🎶🎶🎸
Excellent Swamiji
Swamiji pronam.
I love you my Brother.
Your Being is His being.Someone has to open his mind to understand this Truth.
Deepest reverence to shri swamiji , In which talk can I understand more on adhyaas .
Brahma satyam jagan mitya.
Jeevo Brahmai na para ha!!!
God alone is true.
@@tickle296 and u are the god
🙏🙏🙏 Guruji
Teaching as story telling. If this is natural for anyone it should be your obligation to society to become a teacher. This lost art is making a come back!
Best representation of Indian thoughts available in 2020.
Interesting that when swami said turiam, the cc write as I Am. Turiam = Tur "I Am". Turing test for I Am
Namaskaram Guru 🙏🙏🙏
🙏😁 thanks for sharing ☀️☀️☀️☀️☀️☀️☀️☀️🌿🌼🌿🌼🌈🌈🌈
Thank you
This video is quite composite answer to the so called arrogant Hindu haters
Can anyone recommend an advaita monastery or organization that accepts men in their mid 30’s? I have an associates degree but The RamaKrishna Order requires a masters degree if your older than 35, which I am. I have the upmost respect for monastics. They are pursuing the goal of life 🙏
You can seek a monasticesque life even while you engage with the world
Super Brilliant! Loved listening to this. Now I wanna take sanyasa and leave my family and be on the path of God. Just tired of this daily bullshit from wife, made a big mistake in life getting married.
Chill out bro .. life is so beautiful.. enjoy the greatness of married life.. spend good time with your kids ... its just my suggestions .. stay happy as always
🙏🙏🙏
It was said that Adi Shankara died at such a young age at either 32 or 35 years of age. Many people have asked if he's such a great sage, why did he die so young? Hopefully, someone can explain.
🙏🙏🙏🙏
Shankara is Shiva.
Swamiji ,That was brilliant. As a student of philosophy ,I can only say that I dare not have believed to have understood Vedanta in these last two years. Thanks for reminding that with your clarity on Sankara. May I ask you if you would ,atleast strictly academically speaking, agree that the Madhyamik Shunyavadin school of Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta are in a subtle resonance of the same basic metaphysical thought? I remember reading how Gaudapada himself has similar views. Sankara does criticise Shunyavada ,but seemingly not for what it is. Hopefully you would see this.
Again ,Thank You. Great lectures. Do speak more on Swami Vivekananda too. After Swamiji ,I like your exposition of Vedanta the most.
Yes this speech has some real gems not commonly known.
It seems Sankara did borrow some techniques of reasoning from the schools of Buddhism. Philosophically speaking, Sankara and Nagarjuna tries to convey the same thing but with a subtle difference.
@@pallabidutta968 Maybe Gaudapada Sankara's guru did. Or maybe Madhyamik Shunyavadins did read the Upanishads.
Ask those Richard Dockins and other people come to Bharat ,
I will make sure that theirs very fundamental will become a question.
They have faced only Abrahmic relegion having an Aasmani kitab, heavenly book , by some damn God.
If he will come to Bharat , he will experience what the wisdom is , what the buddhi and Viveka is.
Here we don't have any damn God sitting up there.
Don't worry Swamiji to face such people we don't require the wisdom of Vedanta even they won't be able to pass on the parameter of Nyaya.
🙏
Because of physical disability I cannot sit and meditate. Can I do so in a supine position. Will that be counted as an ASANA.
Adi Shankara's untimely death is shrouded in mystery and myths.
🙏🙇♀️🥰
Thank You Swamiji! The only thing i thought: All War IS hidden in language indeed! The question: WHAT IS consciousness? , differs from the question WHO IS Consiousness? Because objectivity excists only, as with Yang and Yin, by subjectivity! Both are illusion? Or is the "WHAT"-question' a false one? Namaste.
That was a very dualistic interaction! 23:16 Jk, swami is the best
For a second, I thought swami shot some one.
May I know if there are any pre-requesites to join Ramakrishna Math as a volunteer
for volunteer, nothing
🙇🙇🙇🙇🙇
🙏🏻
Pranams swamyji
Pls where can I find Swamiji's clarification on Adhyasa Bhashya!
Could anyone comment on 2 things I have heard about Shankara.
One is that he was an incarnation of Shiva.
The other is that the last words he spoke to his disciples was, 'You intellectual fools, just surrender to Govinda.'
Yes he was a incarnation of the lord Shiva.
And when he was in the Kashi he found a very aged man reciting again and again the rules of Vyakarana(grammar), by seeing this incident he sang Bhaja Govindam Bhaja Govindam Govindam Bhaje Mudha Mathe which means Sing the names of Govinda you fool. But still for him Brahmajnana was the highest achievement in spirituality. But Advaita Sadhana was only meant for the Sanyasis at that time and the old man was not a Sanyasi, so he told him to do bhakti instead of parroting the rules of grammar at this very old age.......
@@UEEDEBAPRATIMDAS Thanks for your response.
Why exactly you seek answers for these things in YT comments ? what weight does these answers have ? Its foolish to ask such questions in public forum
Once the core of atheists realise the idea of Advaita they would certainly not argue.
The volume of the video increased would be fulfilling.
Nevertheless, very enlightening programme. More, if possible.
"It doesn't reject it, but it supersedes it." This is a key understanding stressed by Swami ji on Shankara's perceived rejection of Patanjali's Yoga philosophy.
I say "perceived" because, there are plenty of neo-Vedantins/neo-Hindus in the West (Rajiv Malhotra takes on Prof. Rambachan in his seminal book, "Indra's Net" on this specific topic), who could be termed as "mischief scholars," who are "using Shankara to shoot down Vivekananda," as Rajiv ji puts it in his book. There is a very sinister goal these "scholars" have: 1. to create 'bhedha' among Hindus and 2. to lower Swami Vivekananda's legitimacy as one of the great icons of Hindu dharma. This is especially taking traction in the recent times because SV is celebrated in India by Hindus as a great Yogi, an Advaitin, and as a man with great kshAtra spirit, post-2014, as India witnessed rise in Hindu consciousness. So, these tricksters will use anything they can find to delegitimize Hindu icons, saints, create division between various sampradayas/philosophical traditions...
This is a very complex issue. But I like Swami ji very wisely refuting the "Shankara rejected Yoga" theory.
Honest and simple approach, Pranams Swamiji. @gmybird
I have read that Swamiji told Josephine MacLeod that he previously took birth as Shankaracharya. Is this accurate? ( My understanding is: Saptarishi Nara> Arjuna> Shankaracharya> Vivekananda. Do I have that right?).
can you please show me the place or book where it is written like that or where Josephine McLeod mentioned it?
Sir can you say when shankara charya born, many places it is written that he born in 8th century AD, but according to dwaraka pith he was born in 5th century. What is more acceptable?
And if I'm not 1 but, say, 0.5 or 0.33 or if I'm 0 or just negative. Will you still believe in me? Will you be able to understand me better?
23:43
What are the best translations of the Sankaracarya bhasyas in english or spanish for the prasthana traya?
The standard well used and popular Shankara-Gita-Bhashya English translation is by Swami Gambhirananda of Ramakrishna Math and it is an Advaita Ashrama Publication easily available in well-known spiritual bookshops in India.
@@radhikakrishnakumar6456 Thank you Radhika I will get that one then. I have already read Swarupananda translation but it has little commentary.
@Truth Seeker what does he translate "ananda" as?
Perhaps you might already be aware, but it's recommended to go for Prakaran Granthas of Adi Shankaracharya before Prasthan Trayi. Please ignore the noise in case you already have covered the same.
@@nachiketsahasrabuddhe6122 Thank you
Thank you for this .🙏🕉️. Peace everyone 🕊️. Om namo Bhagavate Sri Ramana Maharshi 🙏
23:09 On your face dear Brahman !!
Jagadguru Adi Shankaracharya was born in Kalady during the period 509 BC. He established four Amnaya peets and Kanchi Peet 2500 years ago in BC. The Puri, Dwaraka, Badari, Kudali-Shringeri, Kanchi Peets have details of their Guru Shishya parampara right from 2500 years ago with names of Swamijis and their period of Samadhi. The period of SRI Govinda Bhagavad padacharya, Kumarila Bhatta, King Sudhanva copper inscription, Nepal Kings Vamsavali, Scientific examination of the soil flowing near the house of Adi Shankara, Jaina Vijayam sacred book of Jain's also confirms that Adi Shankara period is over 2500 years ago during 509 BC. The western historians and few groups intentionally distorted history to show Adi Shankara was born during 788 AD. Had Adi Shankara was alive in 788 AD he would have even challenged Christianity which first came to Kerala much before.
Mahatmaji please explain chittam. Chitta vrutti nirodhanam means what.
Elimination of changing states of mind. Chittam means Consciousness.
@@Radheshyam-uh6qg No. Chit and chittam are different. Sat -chit -ananda. Chit is consciousness but chittam is only one part of mind where all our impressions recorded when doing anything (manasa -vacha -karmana ). Mind has four parts mind, intellect, chittam, Ahamkar (ego). Chit is consciousness beyond all parts of mind.
@@jayaprakashck7339 Thanks. That person asked two questions I didn't see that. I thought he asked chittam in context of Chitta Vritti Nirodhah.
Chitta vrutti nirodhah - Controlling thoughts and its modifications
@@rishikesh_p thank you 🙏
Confusion about SUPERIMPOSITION.WHAT OR WHO is superimposed on whom?.
the ultimate reality is brahman of the nature of sat chit aananda, everything else including the world, seen and unseen that is made up of naama/ roopa is superimposed on that one reality
World is not Superimpsition. Because Jeeva is the reflection of Brahma on matter ( Andakarana ). So matter is first. Jeeva is second.
@@velayudhanananthapuram6138 jeeva too is a superimposition on Brahman.
Please sir be my teacher.
I'm just a retired janitor and "yogic flyer" (TM-Sidha®) from F-land, so everything I say, otta be taken with a huge grain of salt. 😵💫 It seems to be controversial whether Shankara actually is the author of yoga-suutra-vivaraNa (subcommentary on Vyaasa-bhaaSya), or whatever it's called. Be it as may, Shankara seems to have been an accomplished yogii, because, when challenged by Mandana's(?) wife to a dialogue on Kusumaastra-shaastra, He performed cittasya parashariiraavesha into a deceased king's mortal coil to spend a month in the king's harem for gaining knowledge and experience on kaama-suutra stuff. That at least according to Maadhava-vidyaaraNya's Shankara-dig-vijaya.
Sutra III.38
बन्धकारणशैथिल्यात्प्रचारसंवेदनाच्च चित्तस्य परशरीरावेशः॥३८॥
badnha-kāraṇa-śaithilyāt pracāra-saṁvedanācca cittasya paraśarīrāveśaḥ ॥38॥
[HA]: When the Cause Of Bondage Gets Weakend And The Movements Of The Mind Are Known, The Mind Can Get Into Another Body.
[IT]: (39):
The mind can enter another’s body on relaxation of the cause of bondage and from knowledge of passages.
[VH]: By relatxation of the cause of the relationship (to the body), and the experience of going forth, citta’s entry into another body.
[BM]: From loosening the fetters of bondage to the body and from awareness of the body’s fluidity, one’s thought can enter into the body of another.
[SS]: (39):
By loosening the cause [of the bondage of the mind to the body] and by knowledge of the procedure of the mind-stuff’s functioning, entering another’s body is accomplished.
[SP]: When the bonds of the mind caused by karma have been loosened, the yogi can enter into the body of another by knowledge of the operation of its nervecurrents.
Namaste ...Dear Everyone,
Thought you might like this brief quatrain of Mystic ONEness
Homage to Hakuin
How brilliant the full moon
This very moment ONEness
Anywhere Paradise
Everyone Awake
In The Unity of Spirit Charles Mugleston Omar Khayyam Theatre Company
I thought this lecture was about Adi Shankaracharya Ji
Consciousness deviates from its true being and starts misbeing itself as drashta and drisya.
How mind can be a object? Good thought, bad thought whatever be are functions of mind. Here mind is analysing itself like a computer scans itself.
Who is aware of the mind, of the functioning of the mind? What we call mental analysis is nothing but thoughts in our mind. Mind is nothing but a bundle of thoughts! You are aware of your mind...so you can't be mind...thus mind is an object in consciousness...
All religions are not same and true , swamiji you must read the originals of those with exact translation
I am saying this to Swamy ji at every opportunity 😒
23:10
You did have a class going on. But whats the need to shut the door so harsh on someone's face?
its fun to do. :)
He is giving a speech to an international audience and he is communicating that this is not a good time for interruption. Have you listened to the full speech. It is brilliant, very informative and some real gems.
So instead of raising stupid and moronic objections, listen to the content.
@@sundarrajan1185 shut up useless fellow.
Do you think i dont know its informative and awesome.
When he is speaking about non dualism and at the same time angry with other person makes no sense at all.
I need an answer for his impulsive behaviour. Period.
@@venkateshpatruni7250 He did get angry ..So?!..Did you see his face the next moment?..How calm he was!!
I am quite certain that he was not angry and didn’t shutdown the door angrily. In most of these houses in Manhattan, the doors have a auto-closing spring mechanism, that makes a loud sound while closing. Because of that loud sound, it appeared as if he slammed the door.
As per my reading of various incidents on Shankaracharya's life it seems he was inconsistent in his views.
For example, let's talk about his doctrine and what he actually practiced,
1. He opines that rituals which includes yagnas or any other rituals are not as important as compared to seeking gnana. But at the same time, he himself practiced various rituals such as installing of vigraha of various dieties/yantras and performing of poojas till the end of his life. The same rituals and pooja to vigrahas on a daily basis continue till date in his peeths and mutts. He was against Mimamsa philosophy as it was only concerned with vedic rituals but Shankara too did the same and so does his followers till now in Sringeri.
2. He propounded in his doctrine about Nirguna form of God/Brahman but in reality followed saguna form of worship wherein he venerated and composed stotras attributing to various deities like Shiva, Vishnu, Shakthi and so on. If he truly believed in 'Aham Brahmasmi', then he wouldn't relied on venerating any form of deities nor writing hymns praising those deities.
3. Only Vedas are thought to be authorless and perfect as per Sanatana dharma, whereas the rest like Upanishads, Puranas were authored by men, so holding Upanishads in same weight as the Vedas is wrong, as Upanishads are not considered as authorless, and an author however great is prone to mistakes.
In the lifetime of Shankaracharya, there are supposed to have been many miraculous incidents including showering of gold coins by Goddess Lakshmu after he recited Kanakadhara storam; Similarly his encounter with Lord Shiva; Also in his praises in various stotrams he says Lord Subramanya is the son of Lord Shiva and Goddess Parvati etc., so don't these incidents in his life contradict his doctrine of Advaitha? Were these his illusions or incorrectly mentioned in his biography by Sringeri mutt?
Can anyone refute the above points? I will comeback with more points on why I consider Shankaracharya to be inconsistent in teaching and practicing.
First - Advaita Philosophy doesn’t say God is one. It says we are no different from Gods. God is a knowledge created by the Consciousness. Shiva, Parvati all are different construct but they are all same. Same with the universal consciousness. Therefore there is no problem if you and I show devotion to different gods - as long as we know that they are all same. And we are that.
Second - based on what logic can you say that Vedas are only authentic and not the upanishads? Just because Vedas do not have a writers’ name does not make them authentic and only texts for the Hindus. Similarly just because Upanishadas were written by some rhishis do not make them any less important
@@armitra Thanks for your time in answering the questions.
Please note, I have great regard for Sri Adi Shankaracharya for uniting different sets of people of various sects under the umbrella of 'Sanatana Dharma' and for this cause alone my deepest respects go to him. I have severe differences with his philosophy though but that doesn't diminish his status in my eyes.
1. In my humble view, "Advaita Vedanta" expounded by Shankara is just a word gymnastics to explain the concept of Brahman. He says all is Brahman and it is not realized due to 'avidya'/ignorance but my question is the base of it all, if you have expounded a theory then you should live by example else it is all good in theory only.
For example, we say Lord Rama was a "Satyamoorthy" (symbol of truth) because he lived all his life with those values and never forsake truth even in dire circumstances. That is living life by an example. Whereas in Shankara's case he expounded on the lofty concepts of Brahman but failed to live up to it. Will give several examples on why he failed to live by the philosophy he preached:
1. It is no good in using complex word gymanstics and all but when you are in dire need, you abandon all that and simply pray to an external entity, for example: Shankara praying to Sri Maha Lakshmi for helping the poor woman who failed to offer proper 'Bhiksha' to him when he was going around for asking for Bhiksha. So, Shankara overcome by great compassion composed the fine stotram named as 'Kanakadhara Stotram' extempore and it resulted in the darshan of Sri Maha Lakshmi and the poor woman's house was showered with golden gooseberries (this incident is embedded in Shankara's biography and authentic as per Sringeri Peetha);
2. Another incident which shows that Shankara did not live by the ideals which he preached, for example Shankara was averse to rituals (thereby discarding the Mimamsa philosophy) but when it came to his own mother, he was concerned with performing of the final rites. Similarly, the numerous Sri Yantraa/rituals associated with it and all are started by him and which still continue at various peetha/mutts established by him and disciples. So, these are few examples of contradiction in his actual life and theoretical concepts which he expounded.
3. Another incident is his encounter with Lord Shiva in the form of Chandala, wherein Lord Shiva pulls Shankara making him realize that his lofty concepts of Brahman being everywhere and in everyone is not being followed in real life and Shankara was embarrassed when he was given real life lesson by Lord Shiva.
So, all the above incidents are clearly at odds with what Shankara preached and what he practiced/encountered in his life. Advaitha Vedanta (implicit atheism) is not exactly a revolutionary concept of Shankara, it is highly influenced from the Buddhistic pattern of thinking, only difference in them being the existence of soul (in Advaitha Vedanta) and non-existence of the same in Buddhism.
Finally, to reiterate I have great respect for Shankara's act of bringing different people under one umbrella and making them live harmoniously but don't accept his philosophy at all because he himself did not live up to it in his life which can be gauged by any neutral person by reading the above incidents.
@@critical_analysisyour whole talk shows you neither have understood advaita nor you have read it even. ..
Advaita has two levels. It's upper level is generally seen as only part of it. No wrong.
In its lower level it accepts the dualistic nature of samasara Or world where are differences and difference of God and individual soul concept. So advaita teaches that the lower level is not wrong if you understand that the uooer level is the prime one.
But your journey must be through dualistic nature as you are living in a dualistic world and in this world you have identities of many. So., to teach people the right path shnkara preached stotram of different Deities as only means to untimely achieve the non dual knowledge.
In advaita the lower level is actually a meditation activity of well being of mind and life here. 😊
What's wrong in being an atheist?? Advaita even allows that as well.. I think so...
You can't find one atheist in the whole world.. an atheist shall take absolute responsibility to for everything in the universe. That is difficult. So called atheist conveniently accept certain things and abuse other things. That is not atheist concept..
poorva sharma So, what’s wrong with that. There are militant religious fanatics too. In Tamil Nadu , the fake rationalist Periyar gangs have been militant
@@sundarrajan1185what that peeiyar gang is doing now?
Commentary always not acceptable.my habit is commentary.hether to other wise.mind soul ,brain interactive.
Very boring
.....that fellow is dead since several centuries....now trying to look into his being with your petty closed mind is foolish and stupid....
@Truth Seeker I think this guy is upset he was not called to speak, probably thinks too highly of himself :)
@Truth Seeker .....does one need to care about philosophers or scientists....is it not more than sufficient if one looks into himself or herself...rather deeply ...logic is superficial..
@@ravisrao3816 its possible if u r ramana maharishi...given the way we are, as u so aptly put it with petty closed minds and puny logic...its sensible to take advice and help....
@@arjunrathore8950 ...I am what you are....what anybody else is...no less no more....all differences are nonessential and superficial ......
@Truth Seeker ....if that is your understanding...let it be....
🙏🙏🙏
🙏🙏🙏