The more goes into the ras of Bhakti the more one is able to relate with the Bhagavad Gita in reverse (from chapter 18 to 1) with the conclusion that the question to be answered is the hard problem of matter
After many days of study regarding advaita vedanta , I have come to the conclusion that unless and until one practically sacrifices his lust for the result of his actions , one cannot grasp it correctly and make realize in day to day life. Even after meditating much , there will remain a doubt weather this consciousness exist , or is this just a sham of my brain ???? That is why complete surrender to a teacher is necessary.
@@usc4405 "Watch movies or what ever u love doing without being skeptical" -without being skeptical.....lol you are the "happy meal" of every con artist mate!
@radhe nitsri "experience can not be described." -This is what all those worldviews literally do...they describe how people interpret their experiences.
@@bhaskarjyaachatterjee skepticism,logic ,common sense are limited to your own perception. You have to grow out of it ,not by simply discarding it but rather by making it profound by experiencing new things
What Swamiji said, pretty much confirms my estimate, on reading the term "एकजीववाद"। Many salutations to Swamiji for explaining the definition of the hard problem of consciousness as well as ekajivavada, so lucidly!
You are such a great teacher. Hopes one day I will be able to meet you in person and a have a good discussion on the hard problem consciousness and Advaita Vedanta.
Ekajivavada (radical solipsism) is correct. No one outside of you exists. All others and all things are appearing in your mind. There is no evidence for anything beyond that. But this view is only correct if you realize that you, as an individual, are also arising in your mind. You are dreaming up yourself and a world. The illusion that you seem to have more connection to one particular mind/body is created by the limiting factor of the human mind. As long as you identify with the human mind, then you remain stuck in solipsism. Once you see that you are the Mind that dreams all that is, then you have perceived the truth. We are all equally made of dream stuff.
A very good point. But starting with solipsism as an exercise can be a helpful stepping stone to seeing that all is one Mind. Notice that there is no evidence that any solid objects or people exist. All of it appears in your mind. That's the first step. Then notice that even you - the concept of your body and mind - also appear in consciousness. There is nothing other than consciousness, and that is You.
I agree with everything. However, the problem with "solipsism" is that it's also innately alienating. It gives one the feeling of alienation as opposed to connection.
I think all who know Swamiji love to hear him. There is no need to upload fragment of his lectures. It creates duplicacy, I mean sometimes we have heard the lecture but because of new title we think it's new.
In my opinion, these clips help in revising and re-visiting concepts more easily. For the likes of me, re-listening is not a problem. On the contrary, it's a good quick revision
Solipsism, the theory which states that since I am a thinking being, and if the external world is hallucination like dream and if others are all illusion, then one sence I am the only mind. I think therefore I am. How much sophisticated someones behaviour is, I can never know he is conscious. This metaphysical solipsism as per western philosophy and supported by famous philosopher Rene Descartes.
Consciousness is like water its everywhere but it could be stored in different bottles , it could be seen in lakes, Rivers and oceans .. we know this as different and we call it as Indian ocean or Pacific but in the end its just water.
I have experienced during meditation that mind is the culprit in creating the whole universe as we know it every kind of concepts are created by mind. When the mind stop chattering then we achieve one pointedness and there all desire all suffering ends all questions are answered thereby resulting in contentment and bliss.
Sure you did....every one out of 4.300 religions and 160+ spiritual worldviews have experienced different conflicting scenarios about the universe. So how one can ever evaluate all those unfalsifiable , ineffable claims? And if we can even test them...why even considering them?
@@nickolasgaspar9660 ok do whatever useless things you are doing but i can guarantee you, that you will never be satisfied, that's the human condition we have
@@utubetruthteller I don't disagree with this statement of yours, but it is too general and vague. Maybe my satisfaction depends on a well organized global human society that respects other forms of life and the ecology. For sure I will never be satisfied. But what happens with those who are satisfied with mundane things? And how whether we can be satisfied or not relates with your Ontological claims about reality?
@@utubetruthteller So what do you accept as useful and useless in this life...and why every single one of you in here avoid to address questions or acknowledge valid points ?
@@nickolasgaspar9660 sanatan dharma is not based on intellectual framework like the Abrahamic religions but its based on experiential framework, it requires dedication from your side to practice to find out about the nature of reality otherwise if i say about, it will not make any sense to you because nature of reality is counter intuitive.
How we are conscious is as easy to understand as how this sentence can be a copy of my thought in frozen form encoded. And now that you have read it, my thought has become your thought and again dynamic. But of course, since you provide a different context for it and context helps define meaning, my sentence may mean something different to you than it does to me even though I hope it doesn't. Close is often good enough. So how can a written sentence be a frozen thought? To answer in a way that will convince one's self that the answer accurately reflects the actuality and that one understands it, all one need do is think well about it.
We can pursue advaita but we will have to recognise the law of existence, the characteristics of body, buddhi, ahankara manas chitta and do the correct form of karma to reach there. Its true about oneness but other sides of the coin also exists so we have to build a method. If I were to put it in an interpretation, its like a rock. Various sides but as a whole its still a rock. At one perception of physical you see this, another perception of qualities you see another. Many sides and aspect they flow like one river. Trying to turn into a physical means human beings are not recognising their own reasoning mind and its qualities properly so no matter what physical means is applied to solve this. Material without spirituality will end up causing fear unknowingly, blindness, suffering while living etc such but no growth
I believe that my personal consciousness is as likely to extend beyond the death of my material body, as is the personal consciousness of an alligator.
Swami ji, Please excuse me for this. I think the idea of comparing dream state to waking state came from Gowdapada Karika of Mandukya upanishad(or could be earlier).Nobody else exist but me is true only when I place my self in Bramhan. It is not true when I place my self in the body and 'litle I'. Just my two cents.
there is Oneness called Universal Consciousness and when the same is reflected in our physical body its called bio-consciousness... its like a drop in the ocean , but have the same properties of the ocean... soul is nothing but life-force and its functions... its the physical dimension of consciousness... i.e brahman itself transforms as life-force parcles... bhrahman is space, life-force is particles.... Aware of Shiva-Shakthi concept ? its the same... the whole universe is the transformation of shiva-sakthi, or the cosmic dance of Shiva !! Amazing right?
Being a science student, this question (exactly same), was troubling me since last year. Still, there is no answer. The question arises which molecules (in our brain), produce first person experience, or if it's soul who experiences, then how these materialistic molecules (neurons) transfer information to our soul. (non-materialistic).
Sir Roger Penrose and Stuart Hameroff discuss how the discovery of quantum vibrations in 'microtubules' corroborates the theory of consciousness www.elsevier.com/connect/q-and-a-2-renowned-physicists-on-the-controversial-theory-of-consciousness
@@dare-er7sw cool....a physicist and a Anesthesiologists who ignores scientific principles and established paradigms tying to explain a biological property. What's next ...inviting biologists to talk about Quantum Interpretations and fuel injection? lol
@@nickolasgaspar9660 Check the NDE literature. They can't be ignored. Penrose and hameroff are just trying to make sense of consciousness. How can anyone just ignore the many NDE accounts, some very famous ones like dannion Brinkley, eben Alexander, Anita moorjani, shared NDE of jan price with her pet dog maggi, George ritchie, and countless others. Your comments are just baffling but it reflects the overall thinking of the scientific community. Science means investigation. Pls investigate all these near death experience accounts. Are they mere hallucinations of a dying brain? Bullshit! It points to a deeper reality that consciousness operates independently of the body. Yes it can and it doesn't depend on science or anything else.
@@dare-er7sw NDE literature records unfalsifiable interpretations of people's experience. Its an logical error to use more claims as evidence for your previous claims. Penrose and Hameroff are not Neuroscientists, they do not have the tools or the knowledge to understand a biological phenomenon. -"How can anyone just ignore the many NDE accounts, some very famous ones like dannion Brinkley, eben Alexander, Anita moorjani, shared NDE of jan price with her pet dog maggi, George ritchie, and countless others." -Easy. a. We don't accept claims based on popularity (Ad populum fallacy). We don't accept claims that can't be objectively verified or falsified. We don't accept supernatural claims as explanations, specially when we can reproduce those experience by purely naturalistic means and conditions. Using a claim in favor of a bigger mystery doesn't qualify as an answer for a small mystery. -"Your comments are just baffling but it reflects the overall thinking of the scientific community." -Now you are pulling my leg right? What you call over thinking it is identified as "scientific education". -"Science means investigation." -Science means Knowledge (Scientia). Knowledge is a claim that is in agreement with facts of reality and it can be used to inform our opinion,behavior and acts. -"Pls investigate all these near death experience accounts." -Do you really think that science hasn't investigated all those claims already?seriously. Those are claims and unfalsifiable interpretations of subjective experiences. How can we evaluate the truth value of those conflicting claims. In addition to that the world's largest ever study of NDEs and OBE (AWARE (AWAreness during REsuscitation)) has failed to provide Positive Strong correlations between claims and facts provided by the study,. -"Are they mere hallucinations of a dying brain? Bullshit!" -Since we can reproduce the experience by depriving brains of oxygen or intoxication it is the most probable explanation. The cultural elements in people's testimonies also prove that it is a product of our mind ...not something that our mind experiences externally. -"It points to a deeper reality that consciousness operates independently of the body." -Yes this is what many people believe. The big question is WHY and how one an prove that bold claim??? -"Yes it can and it doesn't depend on science or anything else." -Again this is your faith based worldview based on anecdotal testimonies. Do you have any objective evidence to back up those claims?
Swamiji, I have a question, conciousness is a very mysterious or miraculous thing which doesn't seem to have risen from the physical brain.....in fact modern neuroscience is curious about that.......... But can you tell about the split brain phenomena, in which if a neurologist cuts your corpus callosum then the two hemispheres of your brain will behave independently, like to have seperate conciousness, in other words conciousness can be divided into two by running a knife through your corpus callosum?
If this world is illusory perception of a single soul who is that perceiver? This needs to be examined. This world is an imagination of a person who is different from us. When we are the products of his imagination we will not be prompted to do any spiritual pursuits (Saadhana) for our liberation from Samsaara. If we are the creation of imagination of a single soul like dream world, from reality, we do not have existence at all. We all will be dissolved when realization occurs to that perceiver. Leaving us, he alone remains. He only has the chance of getting liberation. If that is the case why do we have to strive for liberation? Why do we have to struggle for someone else’s liberation? Getting entangled by these questions, no one will have any desire for spiritual pursuits. The person who is imagining this world is none other than himself. If this is the explanation, how can it be confirmed that among the millions of jiivaas it is this particular person who is imagining? This question remains to be answered. The great seer, who is propagating or teaching that this world is his projection, does he see this world and the subjects? If he does not see anybody or anything and if he has full knowledge that this world is just his projection (Kaalpanika), what does he teach and to whom? When he does not see anything in the world, with what spiritual pursuits he can engage himself? When he sees his own images in hundreds of mirrors or when he does not see anybody else, does he give a lengthy lecture? Having understood that the world and the people whom he perceives are real, if that great-enlightened person preaches the unreality of the world, it will be a great self-deception. Having a feeling in his mind that this world is real and preaching that this world is unreal, is it not a self-deceit? Therefore to say this world is imagination of a single person is a great joke. Hence this world is not just the imagination of a single person. It is created as real by God and other demi-gods by their knowledge and will-power. (Sankalpa Shakti)
Indranil Mukherjee Ji you are correct , I too eager to learn , understand and seek the vedas .But along with that I would say firmly if you are true seeker and believe in reading any "GYAN + PRACTICE" with patience first before being prejudice & biased , then there are ways presently available in our country "BHARAT" that can give experience of "CONSCIOUSNESS "in short span of time .
Thank you, Swamiji. Please forgive the rambling which follows. I just had to get these (perhaps useless) thoughts out there. It seems like Panpsychism was touched upon slightly before 1:41. Panpsychism is misunderstood. In my personal view, a microphone doesn't have a concept of itself as a microphone because is just a name and concept we superimpose upon the staggering aggregate of particles and forces which comprise this form labeled by us as a microphone. The fundamental particles and perhaps molecules may have an extremely rudimentary flickering of moments of phenomenal consciousness. The electron may feel a non-conceptual attraction to a proton and vice versa. Bertrand Russell claims that physics tells us what matter does (it's dispositions), but not what it IS and offers sophisticated arguments that claim that dispositions must be grounded in something else (if I understand him properly). This something else may very well be consciousness. The spatiotemporal behavior of "matter" is really the behavior of an underlying phenomenal or conscious reality. To me, this underlying reality IS Brahman. This can be an elegant solution to the hard problem which actually dovetails with Advaita (though not without problems...such as the combination problem... which affects micropsychism, but not the version of panpsychism which posits the Universe itself as THE fundamental entity. Please see Philip Goff for more on this, if interested). The Chit/Cit aspect of Brahman is in EVERYTHING in widely varying degrees, because the scale of an object is tied to the relative limitation or expansion of its consciousness. I see no conflict between Advaita and Panpsychism. Finally, panpsychism is a good option because it says that consciousness never began to exist. It is the phenomenal aspect which always, in varying degrees, accompanies forces and particles, molecules, cells, and organisms. It refutes both physicalism and substance dualism, both of which face much deeper problems than panpsychism. As I see it and as I understand Advaita Vedanta's position to be, Consciousness/Brahman manifests itself as the entire universe in its endless Lila. Knowing ourselves as that Brahman, to me personally, is amazing and profound, and I largely have you (and Anantanand Rambachan) for that. Ok. I'm going to end my ranting and try settle back gradually into my Nirguna aspect and go to sleep. Of course, everything I have said may be nothing more than a mere opinion. God bless you, Swamiji. May you be well!
Deepak Devanand Thank you for sharing this. I'm astounded that such a book was written in 1912 in the West. I read a few paragraphs and I already see what you mean. God bless.
@@rohit2rule You can claim that I am in your dream but exactly the same I can claim me for you. So,.everyone can claim that all others are in their dream. So there are many jivas who claim the same. So the idea that there is only one jiva is a none sense philosophy. The world is a dream is different than the one jiva philosophy. Finally, self realization is the establishment in the Self. And this is not a final understanding. It happens when ego and all its tendencies (pride, lust, greed, jealousy, etc.) are totally dissolved.
@@rohit2rule I don't need to read anything anymore. The tendencies cannot be transmuted to anything but can only be dissolved. Transmutation has to do with sexual energy. Finally anything that swami says is not.correct just because it is said by him.
Think of who do you mean by the term everyone. Is that the waking one or the dreaming one or the sleeping one? If you explore that "one "as identical with your own different states,you will realise the intent of the Advaita vedanta.
Consciousness will appear to be a 'problem' if you try to study it using the mind and Newtonian physics. The mind is incapable of 'understanding' the consciousness because of its limited dualistic nature. You need to transcend the mind to know consciousness.
That's a spiritual answer for a spiritual question, but I don't think the so-called hard problem is really about that. The hard problem asks why the "body" should have any kind of subjective experience at all.
@@devannaidoo7887 if you say that ...you don't understand what gullibility is! We don't go around accepting claims based on our inability to disprove them. You don't understand where the burden of proof rest.
@@devannaidoo7887 you are using woo woo language for your empty deepities. Truth is nothing more than the abstract concept of the quality we find in a specific evaluation we apply on our claims. This evaluation is used to identify claims that are in agreement with current objective facts of the world. When I say you don't understand how the burden of proof works...that is not a theory, that is an objective facts. Those who make the claim about i.e. "alien simulations" need to provide the evidence. Those who don't accept the claim aren't obliged to "disprove" nothing mate. Educate your self on how logic works.
So Swami Sarvapriyananda thinks that he is scientifically qualified to talk about the conscious state of the mind. What's next Solomon breeders analyzing Astrodynamics....?lol
Nobody has an idea where to begin? That’s a wild falsehood , covered by bald statements throughout . In fact, that statement itself reveals the speaker does not understand Vedanta and its proposition. He correctly states however, that there are many individuals (or views of the Universe) in the room. But he should have continued so there are many starting points to forms the whole. One in the Many and Many in the One ::: Like a Hologram. But many starting points and aspects. It has many facets, Computational, Biological, Physics and etc. Another common mistake people with such kind of hubris like these makes is the finger wagging to signify One. It’s a Freudian slip to show his limited understanding of the Hard Problem. The universe/consciousness is not one, like the number 1, but Unified or Unity. Consciousness cannot be an epiphenomenon from Things or objects? How does he know that? And extremely pretentious to make a claim that Consciousness is emergent only from ONE human. Emergent systems are not easy to grasp, I guess. It’s scientific certain that even plants have consciousness, what about the consciousness of an atom? Or molecules? Like Biononotubes. You see Vedanta has not gone there because it NEVER describes EMERGENT systems. The claim that Ekajivavada is the Unified consciousness is still shallow compared to the current evolution of understanding of what Consciousness is or not, even though it cannot explain HOW it happens, nor does it make the claim that it can. . That is a mystery that will always be there and enjoy. It is unfortunate to see the abdication of critical thinking to people wrapped in yellow bedsheets dressed like an un-made bed who claim some sort of superiority.
Who’s here because of Leo’s blog?
Was hoping for some mentioning of Alien Consciousness
It's a me Mario 🍄
Indians follow Leo gura ?
@Rage_Moon many do, and I am one of them.
Swami Ji-- May the FORCE be with you...always. For you are the chosen one.
The more goes into the ras of Bhakti the more one is able to relate with the Bhagavad Gita in reverse (from chapter 18 to 1) with the conclusion that the question to be answered is the hard problem of matter
After many days of study regarding advaita vedanta , I have come to the conclusion that unless and until one practically sacrifices his lust for the result of his actions , one cannot grasp it correctly and make realize in day to day life.
Even after meditating much , there will remain a doubt weather this consciousness exist , or is this just a sham of my brain ????
That is why complete surrender to a teacher is necessary.
But one must always be skeptical
@@bhaskarjyaachatterjee than u r Wasting ur time.
Watch movies or what ever u love doing without being skeptical
@@usc4405 "Watch movies or what ever u love doing without being skeptical"
-without being skeptical.....lol you are the "happy meal" of every con artist mate!
@radhe nitsri "experience can not be described."
-This is what all those worldviews literally do...they describe how people interpret their experiences.
@@bhaskarjyaachatterjee skepticism,logic ,common sense are limited to your own perception.
You have to grow out of it ,not by simply discarding it but rather by making it profound by experiencing new things
How simply remarkable how Swami allows you to think through issues that most people don't even think about...thank you.!
Take my heartfelt reverence at your lotus feet, Gurudev. Thank you so much for this wonderful video.
What Swamiji said, pretty much confirms my estimate, on reading the term "एकजीववाद"। Many salutations to Swamiji for explaining the definition of the hard problem of consciousness as well as ekajivavada, so lucidly!
You are such a great teacher. Hopes one day I will be able to meet you in person and a have a good discussion on the hard problem consciousness and Advaita Vedanta.
Every Talk is amazing! Just love to listen to them ! Thank you so much Swam !🙏🙏🙏🌹🌹
Swami Ji 🙏🏼
thank you, very clear discussion of the problem of consciousness. How does awareness arise from matter, the body. They are two different things.
Consciousness is the biggest prove of god
প্রণাম
Ekajivavada (radical solipsism) is correct. No one outside of you exists. All others and all things are appearing in your mind. There is no evidence for anything beyond that. But this view is only correct if you realize that you, as an individual, are also arising in your mind. You are dreaming up yourself and a world. The illusion that you seem to have more connection to one particular mind/body is created by the limiting factor of the human mind. As long as you identify with the human mind, then you remain stuck in solipsism. Once you see that you are the Mind that dreams all that is, then you have perceived the truth. We are all equally made of dream stuff.
But calling it solipsism is misleading and prone to confusion. What's really meant is that there is just one Mind. And we all share it.
A very good point. But starting with solipsism as an exercise can be a helpful stepping stone to seeing that all is one Mind. Notice that there is no evidence that any solid objects or people exist. All of it appears in your mind. That's the first step. Then notice that even you - the concept of your body and mind - also appear in consciousness. There is nothing other than consciousness, and that is You.
I agree with everything. However, the problem with "solipsism" is that it's also innately alienating. It gives one the feeling of alienation as opposed to connection.
"Radical solipsism"? Ya gotta love it! Me! Me! Me!
@Cristoval Jesús Amado ... Hmmm. Strangely, I just finished reading Ashtavakra Samhita, by Swami Nityaswarupananda.
I think all who know Swamiji love to hear him. There is no need to upload fragment of his lectures. It creates duplicacy, I mean sometimes we have heard the lecture but because of new title we think it's new.
I don't care. I listen again and again. Every time, i get something new
In my opinion, these clips help in revising and re-visiting concepts more easily.
For the likes of me, re-listening is not a problem. On the contrary, it's a good quick revision
Thank you for this
Solipsism, the theory which states that since I am a thinking being, and if the external world is hallucination like dream and if others are all illusion, then one sence I am the only mind. I think therefore I am. How much sophisticated someones behaviour is, I can never know he is conscious. This metaphysical solipsism as per western philosophy and supported by famous philosopher Rene Descartes.
to many ifs to take a pseudo philosophical worldview seriously mate...!
Consciousness is like water its everywhere but it could be stored in different bottles , it could be seen in lakes, Rivers and oceans .. we know this as different and we call it as Indian ocean or Pacific but in the end its just water.
I have experienced during meditation that mind is the culprit in creating the whole universe as we know it every kind of concepts are created by mind. When the mind stop chattering then we achieve one pointedness and there all desire all suffering ends all questions are answered thereby resulting in contentment and bliss.
Sure you did....every one out of 4.300 religions and 160+ spiritual worldviews have experienced different conflicting scenarios about the universe.
So how one can ever evaluate all those unfalsifiable , ineffable claims? And if we can even test them...why even considering them?
@@nickolasgaspar9660 ok do whatever useless things you are doing but i can guarantee you, that you will never be satisfied, that's the human condition we have
@@utubetruthteller I don't disagree with this statement of yours, but it is too general and vague.
Maybe my satisfaction depends on a well organized global human society that respects other forms of life and the ecology. For sure I will never be satisfied.
But what happens with those who are satisfied with mundane things?
And how whether we can be satisfied or not relates with your Ontological claims about reality?
@@utubetruthteller So what do you accept as useful and useless in this life...and why every single one of you in here avoid to address questions or acknowledge valid points ?
@@nickolasgaspar9660 sanatan dharma is not based on intellectual framework like the Abrahamic religions but its based on experiential framework, it requires dedication from your side to practice to find out about the nature of reality otherwise if i say about, it will not make any sense to you because nature of reality is counter intuitive.
That's so nice explanation
Pranam 🙏🙏
very god explanation
When are Bhagavadgita classes going to start? I am eagerly waiting. Please let us know
How we are conscious is as easy to understand as
how this sentence can be a copy of my thought
in frozen form encoded.
And now that you have read it,
my thought has become your thought and again dynamic.
But of course,
since you provide a different context for it
and context helps define meaning,
my sentence may mean something different to you
than it does to me
even though I hope it doesn't.
Close is often good enough.
So how can a written sentence be a frozen thought?
To answer in a way that will convince one's self that
the answer accurately reflects the actuality and that
one understands it,
all one need do is think well about it.
Swami Ji, I am at your feet please accept me as your shishya. Guide me to the reality.
Ari Ari sir I could not understand what you just said. Would you be kind enough to elaborate..
We can pursue advaita but we will have to recognise the law of existence, the characteristics of body, buddhi, ahankara manas chitta and do the correct form of karma to reach there. Its true about oneness but other sides of the coin also exists so we have to build a method. If I were to put it in an interpretation, its like a rock. Various sides but as a whole its still a rock. At one perception of physical you see this, another perception of qualities you see another. Many sides and aspect they flow like one river. Trying to turn into a physical means human beings are not recognising their own reasoning mind and its qualities properly so no matter what physical means is applied to solve this. Material without spirituality will end up causing fear unknowingly, blindness, suffering while living etc such but no growth
Want to listen more
wow....
I believe that my personal consciousness is as likely to extend beyond the death of my material body, as is the personal consciousness of an alligator.
Swami ji,
Please excuse me for this. I think the idea of comparing dream state to waking state came from Gowdapada Karika of Mandukya upanishad(or could be earlier).Nobody else exist but me is true only when I place my self in Bramhan. It is not true when I place my self in the body and 'litle I'. Just my two cents.
like many waves ..each wave is ocean fron its point of viiew
Consciousness,soul and bhramana are the same things?
there is Oneness called Universal Consciousness and when the same is reflected in our physical body its called bio-consciousness... its like a drop in the ocean , but have the same properties of the ocean... soul is nothing but life-force and its functions... its the physical dimension of consciousness... i.e brahman itself transforms as life-force parcles... bhrahman is space, life-force is particles.... Aware of Shiva-Shakthi concept ? its the same... the whole universe is the transformation of shiva-sakthi, or the cosmic dance of Shiva !! Amazing right?
🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
Being a science student, this question (exactly same), was troubling me since last year. Still, there is no answer. The question arises which molecules (in our brain), produce first person experience, or if it's soul who experiences, then how these materialistic molecules (neurons) transfer information to our soul. (non-materialistic).
Sir Roger Penrose and Stuart Hameroff discuss how the discovery of quantum vibrations in 'microtubules' corroborates the theory of consciousness
www.elsevier.com/connect/q-and-a-2-renowned-physicists-on-the-controversial-theory-of-consciousness
You can study Neuroscience.......
@@dare-er7sw cool....a physicist and a Anesthesiologists who ignores scientific principles and established paradigms tying to explain a biological property. What's next ...inviting biologists to talk about Quantum Interpretations and fuel injection? lol
@@nickolasgaspar9660 Check the NDE literature. They can't be ignored. Penrose and hameroff are just trying to make sense of consciousness. How can anyone just ignore the many NDE accounts, some very famous ones like dannion Brinkley, eben Alexander, Anita moorjani, shared NDE of jan price with her pet dog maggi, George ritchie, and countless others. Your comments are just baffling but it reflects the overall thinking of the scientific community. Science means investigation. Pls investigate all these near death experience accounts. Are they mere hallucinations of a dying brain? Bullshit! It points to a deeper reality that consciousness operates independently of the body. Yes it can and it doesn't depend on science or anything else.
@@dare-er7sw NDE literature records unfalsifiable interpretations of people's experience. Its an logical error to use more claims as evidence for your previous claims.
Penrose and Hameroff are not Neuroscientists, they do not have the tools or the knowledge to understand a biological phenomenon.
-"How can anyone just ignore the many NDE accounts, some very famous ones like dannion Brinkley, eben Alexander, Anita moorjani, shared NDE of jan price with her pet dog maggi, George ritchie, and countless others."
-Easy. a. We don't accept claims based on popularity (Ad populum fallacy).
We don't accept claims that can't be objectively verified or falsified.
We don't accept supernatural claims as explanations, specially when we can reproduce those experience by purely naturalistic means and conditions.
Using a claim in favor of a bigger mystery doesn't qualify as an answer for a small mystery.
-"Your comments are just baffling but it reflects the overall thinking of the scientific community."
-Now you are pulling my leg right? What you call over thinking it is identified as "scientific education".
-"Science means investigation."
-Science means Knowledge (Scientia). Knowledge is a claim that is in agreement with facts of reality and it can be used to inform our opinion,behavior and acts.
-"Pls investigate all these near death experience accounts."
-Do you really think that science hasn't investigated all those claims already?seriously.
Those are claims and unfalsifiable interpretations of subjective experiences. How can we evaluate the truth value of those conflicting claims.
In addition to that the world's largest ever study of NDEs and OBE (AWARE (AWAreness during REsuscitation)) has failed to provide Positive Strong correlations between claims and facts provided by the study,.
-"Are they mere hallucinations of a dying brain? Bullshit!"
-Since we can reproduce the experience by depriving brains of oxygen or intoxication it is the most probable explanation. The cultural elements in people's testimonies also prove that it is a product of our mind ...not something that our mind experiences externally.
-"It points to a deeper reality that consciousness operates independently of the body."
-Yes this is what many people believe. The big question is WHY and how one an prove that bold claim???
-"Yes it can and it doesn't depend on science or anything else."
-Again this is your faith based worldview based on anecdotal testimonies. Do you have any objective evidence to back up those claims?
My head hurts 🙄
Swamiji, I have a question, conciousness is a very mysterious or miraculous thing which doesn't seem to have risen from the physical brain.....in fact modern neuroscience is curious about that..........
But can you tell about the split brain phenomena, in which if a neurologist cuts your corpus callosum then the two hemispheres of your brain will behave independently, like to have seperate conciousness, in other words conciousness can be divided into two by running a knife through your corpus callosum?
If this world is illusory perception of a single soul
who is that perceiver? This needs to be examined. This
world is an imagination of a person who is different from
us. When we are the products of his imagination we will
not be prompted to do any spiritual pursuits (Saadhana)
for our liberation from Samsaara. If we are the creation of
imagination of a single soul like dream world, from reality,
we do not have existence at all. We all will be dissolved
when realization occurs to that perceiver. Leaving us, he
alone remains. He only has the chance of getting liberation.
If that is the case why do we have to strive for liberation?
Why do we have to struggle for someone else’s liberation?
Getting entangled by these questions, no one will have any
desire for spiritual pursuits.
The person who is imagining this world is none other
than himself. If this is the explanation, how can it be
confirmed that among the millions of jiivaas it is this
particular person who is imagining? This question remains
to be answered. The great seer, who is propagating or
teaching that this world is his projection, does he see this
world and the subjects? If he does not see anybody or
anything and if he has full knowledge that this world is just
his projection (Kaalpanika), what does he teach and to
whom? When he does not see anything in the world, with
what spiritual pursuits he can engage himself? When he
sees his own images in hundreds of mirrors or when he
does not see anybody else, does he give a lengthy lecture?
Having understood that the world and the people whom he
perceives are real, if that great-enlightened person preaches
the unreality of the world, it will be a great self-deception.
Having a feeling in his mind that this world is real and
preaching that this world is unreal, is it not a self-deceit?
Therefore to say this world is imagination of a single person
is a great joke. Hence this world is not just the imagination
of a single person. It is created as real by God and other
demi-gods by their knowledge and will-power. (Sankalpa
Shakti)
Very good inquiry and analysis. Ekajivavada is a no sense philosophy, without any basis and reason.
7:32 ...what about you swami part... It's all a part of your imagination. You imagined him this way to lead you to who you truly are.
@ 6:47 what a paradox !!!!
IT is used to guide to the enlightenment.Many procedure s applied to guide you to the truth in ancient scripture like ekjivavada etc.
Indranil Mukherjee Ji you are correct , I too eager to learn , understand and seek the vedas .But along with that I would say firmly if you are true seeker and believe in reading any "GYAN + PRACTICE" with patience first before being prejudice & biased , then there are ways presently available in our country "BHARAT" that can give experience of "CONSCIOUSNESS "in short span of time .
ANAND CHITCHAT assimilation is needed.Practice + gyan.Go ahead brother you will attain supreme.
Everyone has their Right to choose the option or even ignore options without listening also.
ANAND CHITCHAT so?who binds you to choosing your options?you or any other person?😊
Thank you, Swamiji. Please forgive the rambling which follows. I just had to get these (perhaps useless) thoughts out there.
It seems like Panpsychism was touched upon slightly before 1:41. Panpsychism is misunderstood. In my personal view, a microphone doesn't have a concept of itself as a microphone because is just a name and concept we superimpose upon the staggering aggregate of particles and forces which comprise this form labeled by us as a microphone. The fundamental particles and perhaps molecules may have an extremely rudimentary flickering of moments of phenomenal consciousness. The electron may feel a non-conceptual attraction to a proton and vice versa. Bertrand Russell claims that physics tells us what matter does (it's dispositions), but not what it IS and offers sophisticated arguments that claim that dispositions must be grounded in something else (if I understand him properly). This something else may very well be consciousness. The spatiotemporal behavior of "matter" is really the behavior of an underlying phenomenal or conscious reality. To me, this underlying reality IS Brahman. This can be an elegant solution to the hard problem which actually dovetails with Advaita (though not without problems...such as the combination problem... which affects micropsychism, but not the version of panpsychism which posits the Universe itself as THE fundamental entity. Please see Philip Goff for more on this, if interested). The Chit/Cit aspect of Brahman is in EVERYTHING in widely varying degrees, because the scale of an object is tied to the relative limitation or expansion of its consciousness. I see no conflict between Advaita and Panpsychism. Finally, panpsychism is a good option because it says that consciousness never began to exist. It is the phenomenal aspect which always, in varying degrees, accompanies forces and particles, molecules, cells, and organisms. It refutes both physicalism and substance dualism, both of which face much deeper problems than panpsychism.
As I see it and as I understand Advaita Vedanta's position to be, Consciousness/Brahman manifests itself as the entire universe in its endless Lila. Knowing ourselves as that Brahman, to me personally, is amazing and profound, and I largely have you (and Anantanand Rambachan) for that. Ok. I'm going to end my ranting and try settle back gradually into my Nirguna aspect and go to sleep. Of course, everything I have said may be nothing more than a mere opinion. God bless you, Swamiji. May you be well!
Deepak Devanand Thank you for sharing this. I'm astounded that such a book was written in 1912 in the West. I read a few paragraphs and I already see what you mean. God bless.
The fact that everyone can say I am the only one jiva that exists makes this ekajivada a non sense philosophy.
@@rohit2rule You can claim that I am in your dream but exactly the same I can claim me for you. So,.everyone can claim that all others are in their dream. So there are many jivas who claim the same. So the idea that there is only one jiva is a none sense philosophy.
The world is a dream is different than the one jiva philosophy.
Finally, self realization is the establishment in the Self. And this is not a final understanding. It happens when ego and all its tendencies (pride, lust, greed, jealousy, etc.) are totally dissolved.
@@rohit2rule I don't need to read anything anymore. The tendencies cannot be transmuted to anything but can only be dissolved. Transmutation has to do with sexual energy.
Finally anything that swami says is not.correct just because it is said by him.
@हवाई बकरी Thanks. However, I have already found the perl . I continue cleanesing the stone.
@हवाई बकरी There is no becoming timeless. What belongs to time remains in time and Consciousness is always timeless.
Think of who do you mean by the term everyone.
Is that the waking one or the dreaming one or the sleeping one?
If you explore that "one "as identical with your own different states,you will realise the intent of the Advaita vedanta.
A sun has risen in the west. He will cause a Tsunami.
That sun actually rose in the east , just like it should . It is later that ‘ he ‘ was seen in the West 😊
Eka Jiva Vada is impossible to prove or disprove
“Eka Jiva Vada” Look up “The Egg” by Andy Weir
😊👌
I don't think the swami gave us an answer to the hard problem. Did he?
Consciousness will appear to be a 'problem' if you try to study it using the mind and Newtonian physics. The mind is incapable of 'understanding' the consciousness because of its limited dualistic nature. You need to transcend the mind to know consciousness.
That's a spiritual answer for a spiritual question, but I don't think the so-called hard problem is really about that. The hard problem asks why the "body" should have any kind of subjective experience at all.
He does give an answer in another video. Watch his discussion of Kena Upanishad.
Just a theory, a concept. Makes little sense.
You could be an avatar in an alien's simulation experiment. Cant disprove that.
Logical fallacies are not your strong point right?
@@nickolasgaspar9660 But gullibility is certainly yours.
@@devannaidoo7887 if you say that ...you don't understand what gullibility is!
We don't go around accepting claims based on our inability to disprove them. You don't understand where the burden of proof rest.
@@nickolasgaspar9660 :) you're confused. Truth is a pathless land. Yours is but only a theory. It lacks empirical evidence.
@@devannaidoo7887 you are using woo woo language for your empty deepities.
Truth is nothing more than the abstract concept of the quality we find in a specific evaluation we apply on our claims. This evaluation is used to identify claims that are in agreement with current objective facts of the world.
When I say you don't understand how the burden of proof works...that is not a theory, that is an objective facts. Those who make the claim about i.e. "alien simulations" need to provide the evidence. Those who don't accept the claim aren't obliged to "disprove" nothing mate. Educate your self on how logic works.
So Swami Sarvapriyananda thinks that he is scientifically qualified to talk about the conscious state of the mind.
What's next Solomon breeders analyzing Astrodynamics....?lol
Nobody has an idea where to begin? That’s a wild falsehood , covered by bald statements throughout .
In fact, that statement itself reveals the speaker does not understand Vedanta and its proposition.
He correctly states however, that there are many individuals (or views of the Universe) in the room. But he should have continued so there are many starting points to forms the whole.
One in the Many and Many in the One ::: Like a Hologram. But many starting points and aspects. It has many facets, Computational, Biological, Physics and etc.
Another common mistake people with such kind of hubris like these makes is the finger wagging to signify One. It’s a Freudian slip to show his limited understanding of the Hard Problem.
The universe/consciousness is not one, like the number 1, but Unified or Unity.
Consciousness cannot be an epiphenomenon from Things or objects?
How does he know that? And extremely pretentious to make a claim that Consciousness is emergent only from ONE human. Emergent systems are not easy to grasp, I guess.
It’s scientific certain that even plants have consciousness, what about the consciousness of an atom? Or molecules? Like Biononotubes. You see Vedanta has not gone there because it NEVER describes EMERGENT systems.
The claim that Ekajivavada is the Unified consciousness is still shallow compared to the current evolution of understanding of what Consciousness is or not, even though it cannot explain HOW it happens, nor does it make the claim that it can. .
That is a mystery that will always be there and enjoy.
It is unfortunate to see the abdication of critical thinking to people wrapped in yellow bedsheets dressed like an un-made bed who claim some sort of superiority.
If you talk like that, you can talk anything lolol