if it is a way of life and you have no practice or tradition of inviting people to it, then its evidently a cultist selfish ideology which keeps people in the dark from its supposed truth.
Your english is poor. Your massage is not conveyed properly, it is giving different meaning. You wanted to say. Hinduism is beyond religion, it is way of life, no sword, no killing unlike islam Or Christianity. Hinduism doesn't depend on believe, it is based on truth which can be realised by anyone. 🙏🙏🙏❤❤
Very clear explanation by Swami ji. I hope all human realise this and free from duality. There will no hatred among each other. No fight between your God and My God. Everything & everyone is accepted as unconditionally, indiscriminately.
Farhan bhai.. I am simply impressed that you have chosen to post the ultimate'st' of the human understanding of self and reality, that gets reflected in the depths of upanishadic wisdom. Hats off man. Most of us are simply unaware of this....
Beautiful beautiful just beautiful explanation Evey word he spoke makes complete sense very enlightening..... Thank you so much. I felt so blissful....
The concept of sakshi or witness is amazing to hear but I guess its something that should be experienced.. Without experience, maybe we will stop at "What ever I'm aware of, that I am not." Swami Sarvapriyananda's lectures are so complex.. Kudos to all of you who get it easily :)
Whatever you are aware of you definitely are not. You are the awareness yourself. And about Buddhism, there is this Buddhist meditation Vipassana going on around the place wherein we are made to be a 'Sakshi' of our experience and sensation. But they don't question what 'Sakshi' or who the 'witness' is thereby contrasting their own views of 'annata' or the 'non-self'. The whole Vipassana meditation is about being an 'observer'.
@@prarthanakhot331 You are awareness. But is awareness aware of itself? Question to ponder. If yes, then as per swamiji, you are not what you can be aware of. But if no, as awareness is aware of everything, so why can it not be aware of itself? Adveta is silent about it. Kashmiri Shaivism and Tibetan buddism are positive.
Glad I found this talk. It validates a feeling I've had for a while that Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism are two paths converging at the same source, i.e. the fundamental unity of phenomenological existence and conscious experience. They just use different language to get there; Vedanta using the language of affirmation while Buddhism uses the language of negation. I practice buddhist meditation but I find Advaita easier to understand at the conceptual level, whereas Buddhism can be quite cryptic. People may argue the theoretical differences between these two paths on the surface, but as modes of spiritual praxis they both work on expanding consciousness from the human level to the universal level. The crux is to put in the spiritual labour though, not just engage in arguments at the intellectual level without risking the destruction of your ego. If two people who had attained moksha and bodhi respectively met in the street I'm sure they'd naturally see their mutual non-separateness.
Fully agree. I am a Buddhist-Hindu and I agree that these 2 paths are ultimately talking about the same thing from 2 different perspectives - one from negation and affirmation
:-) I cut it to less than a half to get people who don’t have the attention span to watch the whole thing and to get the main points on the table. Swami Ji is very advanced
It is funny that everyone seems to know Eckhart Tolle and no one seems to know Swami Sarvapriyananda. You will find out that even tho Eckhart says that his knowledge comes from his own "intuition", it has an exact resemblance to Advaita Vedanta philosophy. Thank you Farhan!
For sure Swami Vivekananda is the inspiration for not only India but especially Hinduism in America, his words of universal brotherhood were way beyond the times he was living in
To know oneself - the real self who transcends ego, delusions, self ignorant grasping at meaningless attachments - as one truly is, is to experience profound inner peace. Such is the pursuit of happiness leading to liberation from all suffering. Om shanti shanti shanti!
@AK Jha Buddhism gave 33 words to describe Nirvana. They were "the unaging, the stable, the undisintegrating, the unmanifest, unproliferated, peaceful, deathless, sublime, auspicious, secure, the destruction of craving, wonderful, amazing, unailing, the unailing state, unbinding, unafficted, dispassion, purity, freedom, unadhesive, island, shelter, asylum and refuge" These are the exact same as Brahman. Learn your facts
@@indicphilosopher8772 Where did you say that? You can't even prove your own logic. I study philosophy, Shunyata and Brahman are the same, read some research papers buffoon
i.) Breathing (process) is not me, not mine. Nor my soul. It is impermanent (anitya), suffering (dukkha), non-self or non-consistent-self/non-significant-soul/ non-beneficial (anātma or anattā). ii.) Postures (Eg: stay sitting down, stay standing, stay sleeping) are not me, not mine. Nor my soul. Those are impermanent (anitya), suffering (dukkha), non-self or non-consistent-self/ non-significant-soul/ non-beneficial (anātma or anattā). iii.) Behaviors (Eg: walking, eating, dressing, sleeping ) are not me, not mine. Nor my soul. Those are impermanent, suffering, non-self or non-consistent-self/ non-significant-soul/ non-beneficial. iv.) Obnoxiousness and the 32 dirty body parts (hair, flesh, heart, blood, skin, teeth etc) are not me, not mine. Nor my soul. Those are impermanent, suffering, non-self or non-consistent-self/ non-significant-soul/ non-beneficial. v.) Earth (pruṭhavī), Water (āpa), Fire (teja), Air (vāyu), Space (ākāsa) (Primary Elements (dhātu)) are not me, not mine. Nor my soul. Those are impermanent, suffering, non-self or non-consistent-self/ non-significant-soul/ non-beneficial. vi.) Decaying and completely vanishing body (dead body) is not me, not mine. Nor my soul. It is impermanent, suffering, non-self or non-consistent-self/ non-significant-soul/ non-beneficial. Thinking about the Mind: i.) Arising and Vanishing Sensations (changing pleasant, unpleasant and neutral sensations) are not me, not mine. Nor my soul. Those are impermanent, suffering, non-self or non-consistent-self/ non-significant-soul/ non-beneficial. ii.) Arising and Vanishing Intentions (Anger, Greed, and Delusion or Ignorance) are not me, not mine. Nor my soul. Those are impermanent, suffering, non-self or non-consistent-self/ non-significant-soul/ non-beneficial. iii.) Arising and Vanishing Sensual desires (Kamachanda), Anger/ill will (Vyapada), Sloth & torpor / Depression (Thinamidda), Restlessness & Worry (Uddhaccha Kukkuccha), Doubt/suspicion (Vicikiccha) (Five Hindrances (nīvaraṇa)) are not me, not mine. Nor my soul. Those are impermanent, suffering, non-self or non-consistent-self/ non-significant-soul/ non-beneficial. iv.) Arising and Vanishing Matter or Form (rupa), Sensation or Feeling (vedana), Perception and/or cognition (sanna), Volition or Mental Formation (sankara), Consciousness (vinnana) (The Five Aggregates Of Clinging (upadana-skandha)) are not me, not mine. Nor my soul. Those are impermanent, suffering, non-self or non-consistent-self/ non-significant-soul/ non-beneficial. v.) Arising and Vanishing combinational results arisen by meeting Eye, Ear, Nose, Tongue, Body, Mind with Form, Sound, Odor or Smell, Taste, Touch and Thoughts are not me, not mine. Nor my soul. Those are impermanent, suffering, non-self or non-consistent-self/ non-significant-soul/ non-beneficial. vi.) Seeing the Arising and Vanishing Mindfulness (sati), Investigation of the nature of reality (dhamma vicaya), Energy/determination (viriya), Joy or rapture (preethi), Relaxation or tranquility (passaddhi), Concentration/ Clear awareness (samadhi), Equanimity (upekkha) (Seven Factors of Enlightenment (sapta bodhyanga)). (Mahasatipatthana Sutta translated briefly by myself (Suresh Madusanka.) and it is not a perfect translation or a summary. The cyclic process of the mind cause to continue the mind. The Consciousness (Vinnana) is like an lightning which cause to connect Matter or Form (rupa) with Data (naama) again and again. I guess this is how those 5 Aggregates Of Clinging started to work together: i.) Matter or Form (rupa) = Body ii.) Data = Sensation or Feeling (vedana) (a cosmic structural change) iii.) The amount of Data = Perception and/or cognition (sanna) iv.) The power/pattern of attachment = Volition or Mental Formation (sankara) v.) Attachment = Consciousness/mind (Vinnana)
As he says that atma or conciousness is one true not changing experience which goes From every experience so in this case one should be able to feel the felling of sad n happiness or witness every feeling in advance cos conciousness was there all the time...conciousness of certain feelings are happen when certain conditions occurred....
Sir, there is one contradiction...who is this witness that witnesses the witness.. idea like this can go on and on to infinity...is that vedanta? In Buddha's teaching, zero is the origin of two extremes.., e.g. I exist today but I can see back (past) and forth(future), that doesn't mean I will be forever...I am not eternal but I am original. Now my origin can have two point of views, firstly, one origin of two realities, there is nothing like this, and that's nothingness or no-dependence. Secondly, the absence of self in past and future is emptiness or original. So, therefore there is no self. Self is dependent in nature it can't exist alone. Even everything is interdependent, interdependence and emptiness are two different realities only one can exist. And I wish the witness, witnesses the reality of emptiness because everything will be there forever weather you exist or not...now you see to be or not to be... why is it a question.
Thats the cardinal difference between hinduism & buddhism actually. I think its like when you write factorial 1 or 1! , You multiply 1 & 0, which leads to 0. For you, this witness comes from emptiness, so you may formulate the self that way, for us its actually full with consciousness. It's like force of gravity appears not on emptiness but on the fabric of space-time. So without a medium, the changing world cannot be transmitted through. What you describe emptiness, we believe as fullness, or existence itself.
@@TheArkaRoy Bro! its not for me or you this is the law, everything is came out of some mediam which is not nothingness or completeness it is emptiness...well you know the factorial of 1 or 1! let me tell you what is 0! Its 1. O please don't tell me emptiness is fullness or existence itself... emptiness is the reality, the truth. Emptiness has no beginning and no completeness, it's just absence of witness. I/me/self/atman is the derivatives of quantitative and qualitative marriage, means this so called self/soul is depended on body and mind. You can't exist until someone exit or empty the space for you...GN
Pure Awareness is aware of itself. That solves this paradox. Going beyond the philosophic discourses, I believe the "realization after realization of non-self" = "atman". Swamy ji very clearly discusses the fallacy of both approaches. Theravada might risk leading somebody to nihilism. And in Vedanta, attempt to identify with Atman might lead to grasping with false-Atman, Ego-identification. Nagarjuna's middle way could be a balance. As per the Gautama "All phenomena are not-self’ when one sees with discernment and grows disenchanted with stress, this is the path to purity. (Dh 279)" We are all talking about the purity after negating what we had assumed we are.
@@mellowsunrays realisation after realisation of non-self equals self....you don't get it man...there is no one to realise, it's only realisation...see there is a flower, animal, man, whatever...you look at it now...what you see in it...you will look at it with conditioning (sanskaar) or education or pre-perceptions. You will only encounter the self nature of it but you will miss the whole universe in it...in every holy book they are trying to tell you the same thing by taking leverage on this self and maximizing it to the limits of mind and naming it by Allah, God, Krishna...that you are just the doer and he is the controller, thinker, maker, etc of the universe. Long story short be non-self, be empty my friend...then you can UNFOLD THE UNIVERSE IN ANY SHIT ☝️😎😆😆😀
@@RIPtarder If I achive realization, then I would have realization rite? Not you. And same vice versa. When you are telling me "Be non self" you are already identifying me as a separate "being". Self (hinduism) is the way you describe, with your sanskara and preconditioning, when you know you are not constructed ego, that is being non-self. Agree with you that it is essentially empty of all virtues (nirguna), but hey, we still try to describe things the way we can right? And remember all this, including this discussion, is happening in our individual awareness, in individual being.
I often observe the workings and thought processes of my mind and the minds of others...is this my witness consciousness doing the observing? Because my observatiosns distresses me.. Being a witness of all that goes on in my mind and the world..depresses me. What am i doing wrong
That is not the fundamental seer at the core of you - you are seeing your mind be distressed but you are still identifying with that mind. There is an eye looking at that mind and all of its machinations - that is you. The witness you describe is still your mind thinking about itself, intellectually and emotionally, but who is the one looking at that?
Dear Farhan, We always see things that are wrong in Hinduism in Media. But why we don't see things that are wrong in Islam. I am Muslim and love to be a Muslim, but there are things that does not make sense in Islam. We can also call these things superstition. For example Visiting kaba. People waste so much of their energy and money on visiting Kaba and throwing stones there, if instead that money could be invested in betterment of people, we can achieve so much. If one person visits one less time Saudi, he can use that energy and money in planting 100's of trees or giving school fees or tuition to so many kids, or feeds thousand of people. Why no one speaks on this topic. Another useless thing is fasting for entire month of Ramadan. Creativity down, productivity down, health goes down. All these things are superstition we need to fix in Islam.
Farhan Bhai... I wish you make a second round of interview of pandit Mahendra pal Arya... As in previous interview.. connection was weak.. and talks were cutting. So I wish we will see both of you a second time with... With good connection and no cuts of course...🙂🙂
Yes Mahendra pal ji is great. I have seen all videos than I understood and realized that i know far less than him about hindusam. I like that interview.
A video on the burning of original and first compilation of Qur'an by ummayad caliph and what happened afterwards , Is also a subject toto be researched upon, hope you do.
Kindly see the work of Dr Prem Saran Satsangi , ex faculty IIT Delhi , friend of Dr Kalam , in the subject of " Unified field of consciousness " . Mathematical proof of Vedantic consciousness. Religions are calling it sacred sound / omkar / kun / shabd /" word" in Gospel of John.
Surat mann aur rachna saari Sat chit anand yeh gun bhaari Radhaswami prem sey rachi rachna ri That unified field of consciousness is love. Jesus said " God is love " Sufis say Zaat / Essence of God is love.
So if we are aware of the Sakshi, then we must be experiencing it. And if we are experiencing it then we must not be that. So we are not the Shakti. But this contradicts what he is saying.
Attma is projecting our senses toward the object of universes the contact with senses and object the conscious awareness is being operated by attma. Why we experience the different things in different way because of duality of non-dual attma. Attma projects us to experience thing as they are not in reality so attma is trying to reach to the core of object through man and buddhi if attma don't use Buddhi or man attma become passive when it is used by attma the conscious awareness the man or buddhi we experience object. So attma is indescribably indestructible and unknown reality that project us toward unreal its mean the Maya of isswar or poromattma is the supreme and higher than attma. So uponishad is saying about porommattma.
Is the idea of "self " so important to define exsistance...doestnt appear to me logical and scientific..still not bad idea....if you let yourself open up and let buddha speak to you about self and non-self...everything would be clear...
@Lion Of Aryavarta buddhism does not say that there is no atma but it says that it does not exist without depending to some other thing like hindu says atma is untouched, independent and which does not depend on anything. Relativity is that everything is dependent on something,
Saying the void is "not nothing" is the ultimate affirmation of relative phenomenal experience in that there is no void within which there can said to be nothing and no place for the absence of self nor the emptiness of form. Liberation is simply freedom from absolutes. Awareness is as transitory and fleeting as that which it apparently contains. What then can be said to be One?
hindu say aatma is separate from body. then how can say i am sick. i am old. aatma never become old and sick. You should say my body is sick not i am sick because boday is not aatma.
Farhan Qureshi Do watch this video on Hinduism - ruclips.net/video/1iJOfxjaOZQ/видео.html It is 4.5 hrs long but believe me its worth watching as it gives you deep understanding about Hinduism.
You can not understand Vedanta unless you understand Samkhya. and four more darshanas before Samkhya. The greatest mistakes these neo-vedantins do is to ignore the earlier 5 darshanas that culminate to Vedanta. Swami Vivekananda in modern world was one monk who took it all. But even theses latter Ram krishna mission guys usually ignore it. That is a great error !!!
Farhan Qureshi I was schooled in Ramakrishna ashram for Vedanta. They have the maximum publication on any Vedantic topics. With respect to core training for all sanyasis, they all have to undergo intense training on all 6 schools.
They tone down many aspects during public lectures to hammerdown the only "Vedantic" thoughts. However, both in US and in India, minor lectures are always delivered on all other topics. All these sanyasis during their training has to assist senior sanyasis with respect to book editing on various Vedanta topics. They also have various journals eg., Vedanta Kesari, Pranitha Bharatha etc., that publishes scholarly articles on these topics. A core vedantin always ignores 6 schools. They focus only on "prasthana thria" (important three)(Vedanta+brahmasutra+Bagavad Gita). But R.K.Math give importance to other schools also.
This teaching about the nature of consciousness is for who? It has to be for consciousness itself. Why is this teaching today? Is consciousness itself not aware that the whole universe is its appearance? Is this teaching appearance, or is it consciousness itself? If this is appearance, appearance can not remove this knowledge it's unawareness of its own appearance. Teaching itself is consciousness, and then it should be eternal. Why teaching today? Logical fallacy.
Swami Vivekananda revers Buddha as a great compassionate being but he disagrees with Buddha challenging the existence of soul(atma). He wonders how a great being like Buddha doesn't agree with the existence of soul(atma).
When Buddha was asked a question asking him for direct liberation. He just 'kept quite'. This was to point out the 'Sound of Silence' which is the 'Self'. So now here the point it did the Buddha really gave 'the idea' of 'non-self.'
@Contra Bodhi I being a Hindi did many Vipassana Courses and did a two years long course on Buddhism, in the course they teach that 'according to Buddha's there is no Soul 'Annata' and everything is impermanent 'Anichha'.
@Contra Bodhi I would like to know the source where it is proven scientifically. Don't we have there popular theories about energy that energy cannot be created and destroyed? Question that. And according to my interpretation he maybe 'Annata' was just a concept so that we do don't make concept out of 'Soul'. In my experience after understanding spirituality and Meditation I have reached a state where everything is the 'Self' that is 'The 'Soul'. This is my experience so opinions may differ. In Vipassana Meditation too Guruji speak about being a 'Witness' to the sensations. Who is 'The Witness?'
Guruji, As , the bees wanders around the sweet so the Bhuddhism is like a sweet for all Indian home grown Non-Bhuddhist philosophy. Everyone flock around Bhuddhism. Regarding your explanation, it seems you have absorb a wrong information from wrong source and also spreading wrong information about bhuddhist philosophy. It seems your source must be Adi Shankaracharya, who has totally misunderstood the Madhayamika school of Bhuddhism and land at Nalanda to debate with Arya Dharmakriti who was renowned scholars that time. Bhuddhism particularly, Sanskrit tradition Buddhism which are higher academic tradition, mention about absence of independent Atman or self which is absolute and permanent etc. It is totally misunderstood to say that there is no self, what Bhuddhism says is no independent self or ego or Atman. So does it mean that there is no self or ego? No, Ofcourse, there is something known as ego, I, self. Otherwise, how can Bhuddhism talk about Nirvana and ultimately Budhha. If Guruji believes, Bhuddhism talk about no self then if any Bhuddhist close their eyes and banged against the walls then such person should just passed through the walls or else should not be hit by a walls and feels no pain 😆😆😆. So such logic as well as explanation is just a foolish. On the opposite, Hinduism, talks about that ultimate independent self or Atman which is absolute and permanent etc. Therefore, understanding Madhayamika philosophy of Bhuddhism required a very sharp intelligent and investigating mind. Western scholars has translate Emptiness as viodness and nothingness on the basis of relying on other Non-Bhuddhist philosophy which is absolutely wrong. If there is nothing or viodness, then who sees it, talks about it, who realised Nirvana and ultimately Budhhahood. 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
Yeah, I mean he only went to Harvard and studied Buddhism, as well as spent extensive time with Buddhist monks... So probably doesnt know what he's talking about ...
The swami in this video, like almost all other swamis on RUclips, tries to show that Hinduism and Buddhism are on equal footing, compliment to each other. Each one has its own strong point and weak point. This is unnecessary and trivial if not childish. One Brahmin once asked the Buddha if people of other religions can attain enlightens as Him. To which the Buddha replied, in any religion, if it teaches the eight-fold noble path to the seekers, they will eventually attain enlightenment in due course provided that they practice it diligently. So, if you feel Hinduism is good, then go for it. No need to try to advocate. As for me, I am free to choose any path I like. And I, as a teenager,, found that Buddha's teachings make the most sense of all. Now after 4 decades, looking back, I am very happy to have made the right choice. Buddha teaches that we should practice diligently, NOT talk incessantly. Buddha Saranam Gachami.
I think that the existence of an atman implies this dualistic vision. Me and the others, I am different to the other, when we are not a sustancial thing, but something that changes all the time, we cannot say that we are the witness experience because it is a truth that is here to explain only our impermanent existence as a self (it is usefull to explain the reality but it is not the ultimate true it is only a concept), not an ultimate truth (for us buddhists self is not the same as an atman, self exist, but is the consequence of the five agregates, the thing that does not exist is the atman, a sustancial truth that make us to be us). Buddhism does not say that there is no self, at least mahayana buddhism (we change the denomination of atman to alaya consciousness)... we say that the self is an impermanent fenomena (this impermanent fenomena is alaya consciousness) and as it is impermanent it is also interdependent, so here appears the concept of emptiness, all thing and the nature of all things is empty, no that it does not exist but that it lacks of an individual existence, because we can exist as a self (not as an atman), but we completely depend on the existence of the other fenomenas. so we also say that a self depends and exists because of the five agregates, here is the concordance with buddhism and hinduism. Moksha .... moksha or nirvana is the ultimate truth. We are all this fusion with the emptiness in buddhism or brahman in hinduism. so for me atman is no the same as self. atman is a sustance, self is a fenomena. buddhism denies a sustancial me, but we do not denie a self, but it is impermanent and a relative true, the only reality and ultimate existence is nirvana.
Shreya Jha You didn't get me ,Shiva Bhakt,,his Ista devata is Shiva but he never reject shakti in hinduism ,But does Buddists accept Brahma as a God? Learn to make a difference between God and Guru is essential ,To know the real message and reality is what hindu spiritual practice is all about. Messages are different too..If messages are same buddism won't be here..It would have never born as a religion..It would have been one of the branches like Shivites and Shakts as you have said..ASK any BUDDISTS who is their God ? Hinduism and Buddism are different thing..Reality and illusion exists together ,It is Maya and That is how it is.. Buddism is a religion of Atheist.. They have no god.Their concept of Ultimate reality (BRAHMAN) and Atman is also different..If hindus can't make difference..western Buddists will eat up Hinduism and convert it into atheist way of intelligent life..Western white bastard always try to destroy others ..It is in their DNA..why hindus are so stupid? Without a hindu gods(Saguna brahman) Hinduism won't work..Do any Buddist ever adore Kali ?
Japan used to worship hindu gods..and it continued even today.It doesn't matter what different Buddist sections do today...It's about what Budda told in his Pali script and Buddism ,,what it is all about? Some American Buddists worship/adore Budda,Shiva and Jesus same time ....Is there anything me to say?----It is ignorance Today some western people do yoga (they started Christ Yoga) .. and say They want to merge with god Jesus--- It is called ignorance even in hindus some sect the idolised gods goddesses are not worshipped or only gurus are followed------------ They are ignorant. It's not about what some hindus do ..It is about what Vedas,Upanishads ,Bhagavadgita says..I don't try to convince here anyone..Trying to spread truth. I asked so many Sikhs who is their god ,,I didn't get proper answer even today..They seems confused.hindus don't hate anybody ,,But shouldn't accept everything at the cost of Sanatan Dharma.Hinduism already deluded due to fake gurus like saibaba..how much more ? Today hindus are politically correct when they adore Budda and Buddism..Political correctness in sanatana Dharma won't work ..only truth works.
Sorry, atheism never a integral part of hinduism..Only seekers of truth who believe in ultimate reality are hindus..Hinduism accept atheism is a lie created by Communists in India..
Very true. Everything arose from the void and will come back to the void. The Hindus also agree with saying that we arose from Brahman and will come back to Brahman
"no-thing" is not unsubstantiality in its entirety. "No-thing" is the unsubstantiality of you conceptualization (conceptual world). Prapanchopasamam sivam = the auspicious cessation of "hypostatization". And emptiness is not nothingness.. nothingness is different and emptiness is different. Nothingness leads to nihilism. Emptiness doesn't lead you to nihilism but indeed it is the negation of nihilism and eternalism. It is negation of conceptualization. Emptiness is empty of its "own nature" or "other nature". Samsara and nirvana are not different. Emptiness is not different from conventional reality. It is also beyond the conceptual constructions of "oneness" and "manifold". Whatever you claim to be ultimate truth is empty of its own nature..for it is conceptualized. Nagarjuna said, to whom emptiness is possible everything is possible.
If you are witness of consciousness and illuminate everything. Why do you forget something and remember something? If you are witness of something, where is the incidents or objects that is located? Is it before you or already in you? Shanakra school is one of the school in vedanta. Non-duality does not belong to sankaracharya only. His non-duality is like this there is a book, that book has No form No attributes No contents No reader No author. Against bhuddhist who say no book at all. Savarpriyananda simply says that Brahman itself illuminate nothing. He is illuminating that nothing. Nothing contains this world and living beings. Such Brahman is a witness consciousness. We all are that consciousness. Bandage and salvation is for the same consciousness only who is witnessing nothing.
You are not the 'witness of consciousness'. You are the witness (awareness) which is of the nature of consciousness. You are that consciousness that is reflected and witnesses the mind, body and universe. When you the individual forgets, you forget in the mind. But you are aware that you forgot right? Consciousness doesn't remember or forget. Consciousness illumines.
@@punitm6999 where is the mind and universe located when reflected consciousness witness? Consciousness has no attributes to reflect. This reflection means concealment by illusion. What is the content of this concealment?
@@regardsk3815 mind and universe have no independent reality. They are projections of consciousness, in consciousness, observed by consciousness. Just like pot has no independent reality from clay
@@punitm6999 that may not make separate reality. It is same as consciousness or different from it? If you say different what difference one perceive it? If you say same then why u call it mind and universe, reflection cannot happen if it is same.
@@xXKillaBGXx Actually, there is no other God and this is Vedanta philosophy. And this is the reason why Buddha denied the existence of God.. Because I am consciousness and this is the absolute truth.
Hinduism is it a religion,it is the way of life... Not shord no killing no conversion like Islam or Christian.. live your life that is Hinduism
if it is a way of life and you have no practice or tradition of inviting people to it, then its evidently a cultist selfish ideology which keeps people in the dark from its supposed truth.
Your english is poor.
Your massage is not conveyed properly, it is giving different meaning.
You wanted to say.
Hinduism is beyond religion, it is way of life, no sword, no killing unlike islam Or Christianity.
Hinduism doesn't depend on believe, it is based on truth which can be realised by anyone. 🙏🙏🙏❤❤
Very clear explanation by Swami ji. I hope all human realise this and free from duality. There will no hatred among each other. No fight between your God and My God. Everything & everyone is accepted as unconditionally, indiscriminately.
Thank you for this! Great cut! Buddhism part starts at 16:30
Farhan bhai.. I am simply impressed that you have chosen to post the ultimate'st' of the human understanding of self and reality, that gets reflected in the depths of upanishadic wisdom. Hats off man. Most of us are simply unaware of this....
Feels great when someone tells it in simplest manner.
im a Buddhist interested to know more about Hindu philosophies
Check out more of Swami Sarvapriyananda's Videos..
ruclips.net/video/Y1ksfH7vaNs/видео.html
I hope that you say a devotee of buddha instead of calling yourself buddhist!!
Start With Samkhya Philosophy and Patanjali Sutra
dude buddhist is hinduism, buddha never said they are different , his followers started religion called buddhism
What a great teaching 🙏🙏🙏
God does exist, this fact alone refutes Sunyavadins.
I'm following him from many days, thanks for sharing
Fantastic Explanation.
thank you Farhan for another great video with very clear explanation by Swami Sarvapriyananda.
Beautiful beautiful just beautiful explanation Evey word he spoke makes complete sense very enlightening..... Thank you so much. I felt so blissful....
Outstanding!
Thank you for sharing such knowledgeable video.
Swami Ji 💗💗💗
Love this video, it gives me great insight into knowing the self.
The concept of sakshi or witness is amazing to hear but I guess its something that should be experienced.. Without experience, maybe we will stop at "What ever I'm aware of, that I am not." Swami Sarvapriyananda's lectures are so complex.. Kudos to all of you who get it easily :)
He’s like the professor of Dharma, have to watch it a few times to appreciate all of the knowledge he throws at us
Whatever you are aware of you definitely are not. You are the awareness yourself.
And about Buddhism, there is this Buddhist meditation Vipassana going on around the place wherein we are made to be a 'Sakshi' of our experience and sensation. But they don't question what 'Sakshi' or who the 'witness' is thereby contrasting their own views of 'annata' or the 'non-self'. The whole Vipassana meditation is about being an 'observer'.
ruclips.net/video/jx7O2zDqi6I/видео.html please watch it then for detail explanation with examples.
@@prarthanakhot331 You are awareness. But is awareness aware of itself? Question to ponder. If yes, then as per swamiji, you are not what you can be aware of. But if no, as awareness is aware of everything, so why can it not be aware of itself? Adveta is silent about it. Kashmiri Shaivism and Tibetan buddism are positive.
@@mellowsunrays It's like trying to see your eyes with your own eyes...(without a mirror)
Super video.🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
Glad I found this talk. It validates a feeling I've had for a while that Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism are two paths converging at the same source, i.e. the fundamental unity of phenomenological existence and conscious experience. They just use different language to get there; Vedanta using the language of affirmation while Buddhism uses the language of negation. I practice buddhist meditation but I find Advaita easier to understand at the conceptual level, whereas Buddhism can be quite cryptic. People may argue the theoretical differences between these two paths on the surface, but as modes of spiritual praxis they both work on expanding consciousness from the human level to the universal level. The crux is to put in the spiritual labour though, not just engage in arguments at the intellectual level without risking the destruction of your ego.
If two people who had attained moksha and bodhi respectively met in the street I'm sure they'd naturally see their mutual non-separateness.
Fully agree. I am a Buddhist-Hindu and I agree that these 2 paths are ultimately talking about the same thing from 2 different perspectives - one from negation and affirmation
Perfect explenation, thank you!
Superb! Thank you.
Farhan Ji,, if you edit please post link to the original video in the description. Thank you....for all the work you are doing.
:-) I cut it to less than a half to get people who don’t have the attention span to watch the whole thing and to get the main points on the table. Swami Ji is very advanced
Superb, what an explanation, what a clarity, excellent. Pranam Swamiji, charan sparsh.
Music to my ears... 🎼🎶🎸
Farhan Sir y u don't post videos
Best and most awakening lecture ever
Come to know the ultimate (limitless awareness)
Thanks for uploading. Very helpful
It is funny that everyone seems to know Eckhart Tolle and no one seems to know Swami Sarvapriyananda. You will find out that even tho Eckhart says that his knowledge comes from his own "intuition", it has an exact resemblance to Advaita Vedanta philosophy. Thank you Farhan!
Excellent program!
Fantastic
I wish you do a video on Swami Vivekananda and his work in United States.
Viswesh Srinivasan
For sure Swami Vivekananda is the inspiration for not only India but especially Hinduism in America, his words of universal brotherhood were way beyond the times he was living in
Farhan Qureshi brother you are doing a great job revealing d truth to moksha with all are wd you...god bless you...Hare Ram hare Krishna 🙏
ruclips.net/video/Vpv8eMlXuzM/видео.html
@@wahdat-al-wujud want more videos like this
Thanks
To know oneself - the real self who transcends ego, delusions, self ignorant grasping at meaningless attachments - as one truly is, is to experience profound inner peace. Such is the pursuit of happiness leading to liberation from all suffering. Om shanti shanti shanti!
Thank you 🙏
Intellectual bliss!
"If not awareness in a body ", then how come blind people only dream of sound and not forms, ?
This guy is freakin dope.. ❤
Swamiji ! Buddhism doesn't say that "self" doesnt exist but It days that the self like self sufficent doesnt exist! "
@AK Jha Buddhism gave 33 words to describe Nirvana. They were "the unaging, the stable, the undisintegrating, the unmanifest, unproliferated, peaceful, deathless, sublime, auspicious, secure, the destruction of craving, wonderful, amazing, unailing, the unailing state, unbinding, unafficted, dispassion, purity, freedom, unadhesive, island, shelter, asylum and refuge" These are the exact same as Brahman. Learn your facts
@@shivendias9602
This shunyata concept does come from Buddhist and there was a buddhist sect known as shunyavadins.. Learn your history and facts
@@indicphilosopher8772 That's what I just said idiot. lol, Brahman and Shunyata are the same
@@shivendias9602
They are not the same
Thats what i am trying to say
Buffoon
@@indicphilosopher8772 Where did you say that? You can't even prove your own logic. I study philosophy, Shunyata and Brahman are the same, read some research papers buffoon
The all seeing eye of man never sleeps, it is always watchful
i.) Breathing (process) is not me, not mine. Nor my soul. It is impermanent (anitya), suffering (dukkha), non-self or non-consistent-self/non-significant-soul/ non-beneficial (anātma or anattā).
ii.) Postures (Eg: stay sitting down, stay standing, stay sleeping) are not me, not mine. Nor my soul. Those are impermanent (anitya), suffering (dukkha), non-self or non-consistent-self/ non-significant-soul/ non-beneficial (anātma or anattā).
iii.) Behaviors (Eg: walking, eating, dressing, sleeping ) are not me, not mine. Nor my soul. Those are impermanent, suffering, non-self or non-consistent-self/ non-significant-soul/ non-beneficial.
iv.) Obnoxiousness and the 32 dirty body parts (hair, flesh, heart, blood, skin, teeth etc) are not me, not mine. Nor my soul. Those are impermanent, suffering, non-self or non-consistent-self/ non-significant-soul/ non-beneficial.
v.) Earth (pruṭhavī), Water (āpa), Fire (teja), Air (vāyu), Space (ākāsa) (Primary Elements (dhātu)) are not me, not mine. Nor my soul. Those are impermanent, suffering, non-self or non-consistent-self/ non-significant-soul/ non-beneficial.
vi.) Decaying and completely vanishing body (dead body) is not me, not mine. Nor my soul. It is impermanent, suffering, non-self or non-consistent-self/ non-significant-soul/ non-beneficial.
Thinking about the Mind:
i.) Arising and Vanishing Sensations (changing pleasant, unpleasant and neutral sensations) are not me, not mine. Nor my soul. Those are impermanent, suffering, non-self or non-consistent-self/ non-significant-soul/ non-beneficial.
ii.) Arising and Vanishing Intentions (Anger, Greed, and Delusion or Ignorance) are not me, not mine. Nor my soul. Those are impermanent, suffering, non-self or non-consistent-self/ non-significant-soul/ non-beneficial.
iii.) Arising and Vanishing Sensual desires (Kamachanda), Anger/ill will (Vyapada), Sloth & torpor / Depression (Thinamidda), Restlessness & Worry (Uddhaccha Kukkuccha), Doubt/suspicion (Vicikiccha) (Five Hindrances (nīvaraṇa)) are not me, not mine. Nor my soul. Those are impermanent, suffering, non-self or non-consistent-self/ non-significant-soul/ non-beneficial.
iv.) Arising and Vanishing Matter or Form (rupa), Sensation or Feeling (vedana), Perception and/or cognition (sanna), Volition or Mental Formation (sankara), Consciousness (vinnana) (The Five Aggregates Of Clinging (upadana-skandha)) are not me, not mine. Nor my soul. Those are impermanent, suffering, non-self or non-consistent-self/ non-significant-soul/ non-beneficial.
v.) Arising and Vanishing combinational results arisen by meeting Eye, Ear, Nose, Tongue, Body, Mind with Form, Sound, Odor or Smell, Taste, Touch and Thoughts are not me, not mine. Nor my soul. Those are impermanent, suffering, non-self or non-consistent-self/ non-significant-soul/ non-beneficial.
vi.) Seeing the Arising and Vanishing Mindfulness (sati), Investigation of the nature of reality (dhamma vicaya), Energy/determination (viriya), Joy or rapture (preethi), Relaxation or tranquility (passaddhi), Concentration/ Clear awareness (samadhi), Equanimity (upekkha) (Seven Factors of Enlightenment (sapta bodhyanga)).
(Mahasatipatthana Sutta translated briefly by myself (Suresh Madusanka.) and it is not a perfect translation or a summary.
The cyclic process of the mind cause to continue the mind.
The Consciousness (Vinnana) is like an lightning which cause to connect Matter or Form (rupa) with Data (naama) again and again.
I guess this is how those 5 Aggregates Of Clinging started to work together:
i.) Matter or Form (rupa) = Body
ii.) Data = Sensation or Feeling (vedana) (a cosmic structural change)
iii.) The amount of Data = Perception and/or cognition (sanna)
iv.) The power/pattern of attachment = Volition or Mental Formation (sankara)
v.) Attachment = Consciousness/mind (Vinnana)
The ontological nature of self is knowing and knowing is beyond increase and decrease and that is why it is unchanging.
As he says that atma or conciousness is one true not changing experience which goes From every experience so in this case one should be able to feel the felling of sad n happiness or witness every feeling in advance cos conciousness was there all the time...conciousness of certain feelings are happen when certain conditions occurred....
very good editing
13:26 What is moksha?
Liberation in Jainism.
so are the terms saksi and atman interchangeable?
if the awarness is one then why dont i feel others pain and happiness?
awareness feels no happiness or sadness
mind feels so
Sir, there is one contradiction...who is this witness that witnesses the witness.. idea like this can go on and on to infinity...is that vedanta?
In Buddha's teaching, zero is the origin of two extremes.., e.g. I exist today but I can see back (past) and forth(future), that doesn't mean I will be forever...I am not eternal but I am original. Now my origin can have two point of views, firstly, one origin of two realities, there is nothing like this, and that's nothingness or no-dependence. Secondly, the absence of self in past and future is emptiness or original.
So, therefore there is no self. Self is dependent in nature it can't exist alone. Even everything is interdependent, interdependence and emptiness are two different realities only one can exist.
And I wish the witness, witnesses the reality of emptiness because everything will be there forever weather you exist or not...now you see to be or not to be... why is it a question.
Thats the cardinal difference between hinduism & buddhism actually. I think its like when you write factorial 1 or 1! , You multiply 1 & 0, which leads to 0. For you, this witness comes from emptiness, so you may formulate the self that way, for us its actually full with consciousness. It's like force of gravity appears not on emptiness but on the fabric of space-time. So without a medium, the changing world cannot be transmitted through.
What you describe emptiness, we believe as fullness, or existence itself.
@@TheArkaRoy Bro! its not for me or you this is the law, everything is came out of some mediam which is not nothingness or completeness it is emptiness...well you know the factorial of 1 or 1! let me tell you what is 0! Its 1. O please don't tell me emptiness is fullness or existence itself... emptiness is the reality, the truth. Emptiness has no beginning and no completeness, it's just absence of witness.
I/me/self/atman is the derivatives of quantitative and qualitative marriage, means this so called self/soul is depended on body and mind.
You can't exist until someone exit or empty the space for you...GN
Pure Awareness is aware of itself. That solves this paradox. Going beyond the philosophic discourses, I believe the "realization after realization of non-self" = "atman". Swamy ji very clearly discusses the fallacy of both approaches. Theravada might risk leading somebody to nihilism. And in Vedanta, attempt to identify with Atman might lead to grasping with false-Atman, Ego-identification. Nagarjuna's middle way could be a balance. As per the Gautama "All phenomena are not-self’ when one sees with discernment and grows disenchanted with stress, this is the path to purity. (Dh 279)" We are all talking about the purity after negating what we had assumed we are.
@@mellowsunrays realisation after realisation of non-self equals self....you don't get it man...there is no one to realise, it's only realisation...see there is a flower, animal, man, whatever...you look at it now...what you see in it...you will look at it with conditioning (sanskaar) or education or pre-perceptions. You will only encounter the self nature of it but you will miss the whole universe in it...in every holy book they are trying to tell you the same thing by taking leverage on this self and maximizing it to the limits of mind and naming it by Allah, God, Krishna...that you are just the doer and he is the controller, thinker, maker, etc of the universe. Long story short be non-self, be empty my friend...then you can UNFOLD THE UNIVERSE IN ANY SHIT ☝️😎😆😆😀
@@RIPtarder If I achive realization, then I would have realization rite? Not you. And same vice versa. When you are telling me "Be non self" you are already identifying me as a separate "being". Self (hinduism) is the way you describe, with your sanskara and preconditioning, when you know you are not constructed ego, that is being non-self. Agree with you that it is essentially empty of all virtues (nirguna), but hey, we still try to describe things the way we can right? And remember all this, including this discussion, is happening in our individual awareness, in individual being.
I often observe the workings and thought processes of my mind and the minds of others...is this my witness consciousness doing the observing? Because my observatiosns distresses me.. Being a witness of all that goes on in my mind and the world..depresses me. What am i doing wrong
That is not the fundamental seer at the core of you - you are seeing your mind be distressed but you are still identifying with that mind. There is an eye looking at that mind and all of its machinations - that is you. The witness you describe is still your mind thinking about itself, intellectually and emotionally, but who is the one looking at that?
@@zibberebbiz that does make sense, thanks, im observing but my mind is the one being all depressed about what Im observing..it's clearer now
A Sunyavadin says that there is only Sunya (void). But that knower who knows the Sunya is Brahman (God). - SRI SWAMI SIVANANDA
Farhan 👍👏good knowldge👍🙏
Dear Farhan, We always see things that are wrong in Hinduism in Media. But why we don't see things that are wrong in Islam. I am Muslim and love to be a Muslim, but there are things that does not make sense in Islam. We can also call these things superstition. For example Visiting kaba. People waste so much of their energy and money on visiting Kaba and throwing stones there, if instead that money could be invested in betterment of people, we can achieve so much. If one person visits one less time Saudi, he can use that energy and money in planting 100's of trees or giving school fees or tuition to so many kids, or feeds thousand of people. Why no one speaks on this topic. Another useless thing is fasting for entire month of Ramadan. Creativity down, productivity down, health goes down. All these things are superstition we need to fix in Islam.
*Muhammad Sami* :-
May I Know Why You Follow Islam ?
Are You a Convert or A Muslim By Birth ?
Are buddha nature and brahman of vedanta one and same?
Yes one and same
No.
@@xXKillaBGXx Actually yes
I like the Buddhist interpretation
which is limited and blocks seeking nature like a cult.
Both say the same thing
Farhan Bhai... I wish you make a second round of interview of pandit Mahendra pal Arya... As in previous interview.. connection was weak.. and talks were cutting. So I wish we will see both of you a second time with... With good connection and no cuts of course...🙂🙂
I’ll get him back on in the future for sure
Yes Mahendra pal ji is great. I have seen all videos than I understood and realized that i know far less than him about hindusam. I like that interview.
A video on the burning of original and first compilation of Qur'an by ummayad caliph and what happened afterwards , Is also a subject toto be researched upon, hope you do.
square orange light. lights of orange
Kindly see the work of Dr Prem Saran Satsangi , ex faculty IIT Delhi , friend of Dr Kalam , in the subject of " Unified field of consciousness " . Mathematical proof of Vedantic consciousness. Religions are calling it sacred sound / omkar / kun / shabd /" word" in Gospel of John.
Excellent work, checked him out, thank you, I like Amit Goswami too
Surat mann aur rachna saari
Sat chit anand yeh gun bhaari
Radhaswami prem sey rachi rachna ri
That unified field of consciousness is love. Jesus said " God is love "
Sufis say Zaat / Essence of God is love.
So if we are aware of the Sakshi, then we must be experiencing it. And if we are experiencing it then we must not be that. So we are not the Shakti. But this contradicts what he is saying.
watch Swami's other lecture on RUclips, "Who am I?" by Swami sarvapriyananda
Attma is projecting our senses toward the object of universes the contact with senses and object the conscious awareness is being operated by attma. Why we experience the different things in different way because of duality of non-dual attma. Attma projects us to experience thing as they are not in reality so attma is trying to reach to the core of object through man and buddhi if attma don't use Buddhi or man attma become passive when it is used by attma the conscious awareness the man or buddhi we experience object. So attma is indescribably indestructible and unknown reality that project us toward unreal its mean the Maya of isswar or poromattma is the supreme and higher than attma. So uponishad is saying about porommattma.
Farhan , also make a video on "Gorakshnath" , read his history from traditional books and not professional historians and liars.
Is the idea of "self " so important to define exsistance...doestnt appear to me logical and scientific..still not bad idea....if you let yourself open up and let buddha speak to you about self and non-self...everything would be clear...
Of course it isn’t scientific,science doesn’t have the tools to measure such thing.
Hindu believe atma means independent no changing only one ..Buddhist say no atma.. many reasons....
@Lion Of Aryavarta buddhism does not say that there is no atma but it says that it does not exist without depending to some other thing like hindu says atma is untouched, independent and which does not depend on anything.
Relativity is that everything is dependent on something,
@Lion Of Aryavarta No-self in buddhism means that atma does not exist without depending on something
Saying the void is "not nothing" is the ultimate affirmation of relative phenomenal experience in that there is no void within which there can said to be nothing and no place for the absence of self nor the emptiness of form. Liberation is simply freedom from absolutes. Awareness is as transitory and fleeting as that which it apparently contains. What then can be said to be One?
hindu say aatma is separate from body. then how can say i am sick. i am old. aatma never become old and sick. You should say my body is sick not i am sick because boday is not aatma.
As Shunryu Suzuki once exclaimed: "So much suchness!"
Farhan Qureshi Do watch this video on Hinduism - ruclips.net/video/1iJOfxjaOZQ/видео.html
It is 4.5 hrs long but believe me its worth watching as it gives you deep understanding about Hinduism.
I’ll def watch it in four installments, promise :-)
Take your time! It took me a week to watch whole video in parts and every second I spent was worth it.
Off the comment session dear. Better to hear swami without wanting to read anyone's thoughts.
Swamiji, Have you experienced soul or consciousness ? Or just talking by intellectual level by studying vendanta!
You can not understand Vedanta unless you understand Samkhya. and four more darshanas before Samkhya. The greatest mistakes these neo-vedantins do is to ignore the earlier 5 darshanas that culminate to Vedanta. Swami Vivekananda in modern world was one monk who took it all. But even theses latter Ram krishna mission guys usually ignore it. That is a great error !!!
All 6 darshanas must be seen in evolving integration
Indeed, don’t you think Swami Ji is schooled in the six darshanas?
Farhan Qureshi I was schooled in Ramakrishna ashram for Vedanta. They have the maximum publication on any Vedantic topics. With respect to core training for all sanyasis, they all have to undergo intense training on all 6 schools.
They tone down many aspects during public lectures to hammerdown the only "Vedantic" thoughts. However, both in US and in India, minor lectures are always delivered on all other topics. All these sanyasis during their training has to assist senior sanyasis with respect to book editing on various Vedanta topics. They also have various journals eg., Vedanta Kesari, Pranitha Bharatha etc., that publishes scholarly articles on these topics. A core vedantin always ignores 6 schools. They focus only on "prasthana thria" (important three)(Vedanta+brahmasutra+Bagavad Gita). But R.K.Math give importance to other schools also.
Though a Advaitic monastic order, R.K.Math gives enough weight to Ramanuja & Madhwa schools also. Check their publication list. U will be amazed
MI A GUAYFO HAHA
This teaching about the nature of consciousness is for who?
It has to be for consciousness itself.
Why is this teaching today?
Is consciousness itself not aware that the whole universe is its appearance?
Is this teaching appearance, or is it consciousness itself?
If this is appearance, appearance can not remove this knowledge it's unawareness of its own appearance.
Teaching itself is consciousness, and then it should be eternal. Why teaching today?
Logical fallacy.
Swami Vivekananda revers Buddha as a great compassionate being but he disagrees with Buddha challenging the existence of soul(atma). He wonders how a great being like Buddha doesn't agree with the existence of soul(atma).
When Buddha was asked a question asking him for direct liberation. He just 'kept quite'. This was to point out the 'Sound of Silence' which is the 'Self'. So now here the point it did the Buddha really gave 'the idea' of 'non-self.'
@Contra Bodhi I being a Hindi did many Vipassana Courses and did a two years long course on Buddhism, in the course they teach that 'according to Buddha's there is no Soul 'Annata' and everything is impermanent 'Anichha'.
@Contra Bodhi It will be good if you tell this to the department, I just stated the facts and not my opinions and moreover I don't like to debate.
@Contra Bodhi Good explanation
@Contra Bodhi I would like to know the source where it is proven scientifically.
Don't we have there popular theories about energy that energy cannot be created and destroyed? Question that.
And according to my interpretation he maybe 'Annata' was just a concept so that we do don't make concept out of 'Soul'. In my experience after understanding spirituality and Meditation I have reached a state where everything is the 'Self' that is 'The 'Soul'. This is my experience so opinions may differ. In Vipassana Meditation too Guruji speak about being a 'Witness' to the sensations. Who is 'The Witness?'
Guruji,
As , the bees wanders around the sweet so the Bhuddhism is like a sweet for all Indian home grown Non-Bhuddhist philosophy. Everyone flock around Bhuddhism.
Regarding your explanation, it seems you have absorb a wrong information from wrong source and also spreading wrong information about bhuddhist philosophy. It seems your source must be Adi Shankaracharya, who has totally misunderstood the Madhayamika school of Bhuddhism and land at Nalanda to debate with Arya Dharmakriti who was renowned scholars that time.
Bhuddhism particularly, Sanskrit tradition Buddhism which are higher academic tradition, mention about absence of independent Atman or self which is absolute and permanent etc. It is totally misunderstood to say that there is no self, what Bhuddhism says is no independent self or ego or Atman. So does it mean that there is no self or ego? No, Ofcourse, there is something known as ego, I, self. Otherwise, how can Bhuddhism talk about Nirvana and ultimately Budhha.
If Guruji believes, Bhuddhism talk about no self then if any Bhuddhist close their eyes and banged against the walls then such person should just passed through the walls or else should not be hit by a walls and feels no pain 😆😆😆. So such logic as well as explanation is just a foolish.
On the opposite, Hinduism, talks about that ultimate independent self or Atman which is absolute and permanent etc.
Therefore, understanding Madhayamika philosophy of Bhuddhism required a very sharp intelligent and investigating mind.
Western scholars has translate Emptiness as viodness and nothingness on the basis of relying on other Non-Bhuddhist philosophy which is absolutely wrong. If there is nothing or viodness, then who sees it, talks about it, who realised Nirvana and ultimately Budhhahood. 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
Yeah, I mean he only went to Harvard and studied Buddhism, as well as spent extensive time with Buddhist monks... So probably doesnt know what he's talking about ...
The swami in this video, like almost all other swamis on RUclips, tries to show that Hinduism and Buddhism are on equal footing, compliment to each other. Each one has its own strong point and weak point. This is unnecessary and trivial if not childish. One Brahmin once asked the Buddha if people of other religions can attain enlightens as Him. To which the Buddha replied, in any religion, if it teaches the eight-fold noble path to the seekers, they will eventually attain enlightenment in due course provided that they practice it diligently.
So, if you feel Hinduism is good, then go for it. No need to try to advocate. As for me, I am free to choose any path I like. And I, as a teenager,, found that Buddha's teachings make the most sense of all. Now after 4 decades, looking back, I am very happy to have made the right choice.
Buddha teaches that we should practice diligently, NOT talk incessantly.
Buddha Saranam Gachami.
Buddhahood itself is similar to attaining Brahman, as Brahman isn't some boject to have attributes in the first place itself.
I think that the existence of an atman implies this dualistic vision. Me and the others, I am different to the other, when we are not a sustancial thing, but something that changes all the time, we cannot say that we are the witness experience because it is a truth that is here to explain only our impermanent existence as a self (it is usefull to explain the reality but it is not the ultimate true it is only a concept), not an ultimate truth (for us buddhists self is not the same as an atman, self exist, but is the consequence of the five agregates, the thing that does not exist is the atman, a sustancial truth that make us to be us). Buddhism does not say that there is no self, at least mahayana buddhism (we change the denomination of atman to alaya consciousness)... we say that the self is an impermanent fenomena (this impermanent fenomena is alaya consciousness) and as it is impermanent it is also interdependent, so here appears the concept of emptiness, all thing and the nature of all things is empty, no that it does not exist but that it lacks of an individual existence, because we can exist as a self (not as an atman), but we completely depend on the existence of the other fenomenas. so we also say that a self depends and exists because of the five agregates, here is the concordance with buddhism and hinduism. Moksha .... moksha or nirvana is the ultimate truth. We are all this fusion with the emptiness in buddhism or brahman in hinduism. so for me atman is no the same as self. atman is a sustance, self is a fenomena. buddhism denies a sustancial me, but we do not denie a self, but it is impermanent and a relative true, the only reality and ultimate existence is nirvana.
he is talking about advaita vedanta, which literally preaches non-duality.
Budda rejected Vedas .. He said everything is in mind ...He rejected God..Buddism is atheist religion..naked truth
Shreya Jha
You didn't get me ,Shiva Bhakt,,his Ista devata is Shiva but he never reject shakti in hinduism ,But does Buddists accept Brahma as a God?
Learn to make a difference between God and Guru is essential ,To know the real message and reality is what hindu spiritual practice is all about.
Messages are different too..If messages are same buddism won't be here..It would have never born as a religion..It would have been one of the branches like Shivites and Shakts as you have said..ASK any BUDDISTS who is their God ? Hinduism and Buddism are different thing..Reality and illusion exists together ,It is Maya and That is how it is..
Buddism is a religion of Atheist.. They have no god.Their concept of Ultimate reality (BRAHMAN) and Atman is also different..If hindus can't make difference..western Buddists will eat up Hinduism and convert it into atheist way of intelligent life..Western white bastard always try to destroy others ..It is in their DNA..why hindus are so stupid?
Without a hindu gods(Saguna brahman) Hinduism won't work..Do any Buddist ever adore Kali ?
Japan used to worship hindu gods..and it continued even today.It doesn't matter what different Buddist sections do today...It's about what Budda told in his Pali script and Buddism ,,what it is all about?
Some American Buddists worship/adore Budda,Shiva and Jesus same time ....Is there anything me to say?----It is ignorance
Today some western people do yoga (they started Christ Yoga) .. and say They want to merge with god Jesus--- It is called ignorance
even in hindus some sect the idolised gods goddesses are not worshipped or only gurus are followed------------ They are ignorant.
It's not about what some hindus do ..It is about what Vedas,Upanishads ,Bhagavadgita says..I don't try to convince here anyone..Trying to spread truth.
I asked so many Sikhs who is their god ,,I didn't get proper answer even today..They seems confused.hindus don't hate anybody ,,But shouldn't accept everything at the cost of Sanatan Dharma.Hinduism already deluded due to fake gurus like saibaba..how much more ?
Today hindus are politically correct when they adore Budda and Buddism..Political correctness in sanatana Dharma won't work ..only truth works.
shreya jha ruclips.net/video/s93pHrhLxro/видео.html Just a thought..Hinduism: What are we fighting for? ..
He rejected God..Buddism .............."
LOL
His Disciples/Followers Made Him God.
Atheism is Always An integral Part of Hinduism.
Sorry, atheism never a integral part of hinduism..Only seekers of truth who believe in ultimate reality are hindus..Hinduism accept atheism is a lie created by Communists in India..
The true self is empty (sunyata).
Very true. Everything arose from the void and will come back to the void. The Hindus also agree with saying that we arose from Brahman and will come back to Brahman
That is why the true self is Nirguna Brahman....
Buddhism never said atma is nothing hahah very funny
Buddhism just said it does not exist without depending on something
"no-thing" is not unsubstantiality in its entirety. "No-thing" is the unsubstantiality of you conceptualization (conceptual world). Prapanchopasamam sivam = the auspicious cessation of "hypostatization". And emptiness is not nothingness.. nothingness is different and emptiness is different. Nothingness leads to nihilism. Emptiness doesn't lead you to nihilism but indeed it is the negation of nihilism and eternalism. It is negation of conceptualization. Emptiness is empty of its "own nature" or "other nature". Samsara and nirvana are not different. Emptiness is not different from conventional reality.
It is also beyond the conceptual constructions of "oneness" and "manifold". Whatever you claim to be ultimate truth is empty of its own nature..for it is conceptualized.
Nagarjuna said, to whom emptiness is possible everything is possible.
If you are witness of consciousness and illuminate everything. Why do you forget something and remember something?
If you are witness of something, where is the incidents or objects that is located? Is it before you or already in you?
Shanakra school is one of the school in vedanta. Non-duality does not belong to sankaracharya only.
His non-duality is like this there is a book, that book has
No form
No attributes
No contents
No reader
No author.
Against bhuddhist who say no book at all.
Savarpriyananda simply says that Brahman itself illuminate nothing. He is illuminating that nothing.
Nothing contains this world and living beings. Such Brahman is a witness consciousness. We all are that consciousness. Bandage and salvation is for the same consciousness only who is witnessing nothing.
You are not the 'witness of consciousness'. You are the witness (awareness) which is of the nature of consciousness. You are that consciousness that is reflected and witnesses the mind, body and universe. When you the individual forgets, you forget in the mind. But you are aware that you forgot right? Consciousness doesn't remember or forget. Consciousness illumines.
@@punitm6999 where is the mind and universe located when reflected consciousness witness?
Consciousness has no attributes to reflect. This reflection means concealment by illusion.
What is the content of this concealment?
@@regardsk3815 mind and universe have no independent reality. They are projections of consciousness, in consciousness, observed by consciousness. Just like pot has no independent reality from clay
@@punitm6999 what u mean by projection?
Illusion or transformation or change of state?
@@punitm6999 that may not make separate reality. It is same as consciousness or different from it?
If you say different what difference one perceive it?
If you say same then why u call it mind and universe, reflection cannot happen if it is same.
Bodhidharma destroys Vedanta philosophy.
Lol
You have not understood Buddha.
@@ImAbsoluteTruth
So it's Vedanta who have not understood Buddha. The Buddha's dharma is perfect as it is. There is no need to contaminate it.
@@xXKillaBGXx
Actually, there is no other God and this is Vedanta philosophy. And this is the reason why Buddha denied the existence of God.. Because I am consciousness and this is the absolute truth.
@@ImAbsoluteTruth
Buddha did not deny the existence of god. There are many devas who go to Buddha to escape samsara in Buddhist sutras.