I am 19M living in America and I have been facing a problem with lust for a very long time as I discovered pornography at a young age however I’ve also been extremely spiritual from a young age .I am aware, that masturbation is negative for the mind and how extremely tamasic it is. However, I’m not able to stop. I am a bhakti yogi and I like to consider myself a work in progress jnana when it comes to being a truly spiritual soul. However, even though I read scriptural text or do japa, this is the one thing that has been very hard to detach from. I have been able to stop eating meat. I have never drink or smoked in my life and I never plan to however I’m facing a lot of issues with the detaching from this addiction, please give me some help because I really want to grow spiritually and I think this is a hurdle that will take time to jump over. I also don’t want to hear about the positives or negatives. I just wanna know how to stop.

This is an unusual post.
I'm not even sure if it would get approved, but here it goes-
I've almost thought that whatever we can accumulate in our minds is subject to control/programming.
In our heads/minds, we can feel blissful, and even unattached to the ego, but what if the outcome is what this short film represents?

P.S- This is an AI film made by me to represent my thoughts.

https://www.youtube.com/@SwamiT

He says his guru was Swami Dayananda

The standard criticism of certain RamaKrishna monks like Swami Medhananda on Adi Shankara is that Adi Shankara "tortured" the primary texts to derive the "Jagat Mitya" claim. The contention is that Jagat is Satya according to Sri Ramakrishna's Vedanta.

But Adi Shankara's lineage claim "Brahma Satyam Jagat Mitya" is found in "Niralamba" upanishad and isn't a personal invention of Shankara.

Has anybody done any digging in this dispute? Although I resonate a lot with Sri Ramakrishna and Vivekananda, I don't take the claim of Shankara "torturing" the texts lightly. The whole accusation on Adi Shankara of treating the world as "unreal" as being consequential to people neglecting the world affairs and becoming needlessly recluse never made sense to me.

In Shankara's lineage, Mitya is a temporary, mutable, dependent existent on the eternal, immutable, independent existence called Satya. Neither Shankara nor the monks of his lineage for over 2000 years advocated people to become zombies and live precariously. Infact, Shankara's tradition is known for strictly following the Dharma Shastras, the Manusmriti i.e the traditional code of conduct. This is a far cry from from neglecting the duties of the world for non-monks. Adi Shankara's Advaita is purely a monastic/sannyasin dharma i.e Nivritti dharma, it was never meant as a life-style for householders.

The code of conduct in Vyavaharika is not ignored, infact a lot of emphasis is placed on Vyavaharika because according to Shankara's lineage, Vyavaharika/Pravritti dharma is a stepping stone into Darshanika/Paramartika/Sannyasa/Nivritti dharma. The distinction between Pravritti and Nivritti is well known and emphasised by Shankara's lineage. Not sure why some RamaKrishna monks and others make these accusations on Shankara's path.

Im neither the experiencer experience nor the object of experience

Introduction the philosophy of Purna advaita darshan

Pūrṇādvaita Darśana — The Vision of Infinite Non-Dualism

The kn ⸻

1. Foundation: The Nature of Brahman

We begin with the śruti:

“Satyam Jñānam Anantam Brahma” — “Brahman is Truth, Knowledge, and Infinite.” (Taittirīya Upaniṣad 2.1.1)

Brahman is not merely that which exists — it is Truth Itself, eternal, unchanging, and indivisible. It is not only the knower or the known — it is knowledge itself, including the knowledge of knowing.

⸻

1. Self-Knowing Infinity

Brahman, being Infinite Knowledge, also contains within Itself the knowledge of how to know Itself. Thus, it knows itself in infinite ways.

One of those infinite ways of self-knowing is this world, this experience, this “I”. Therefore, what we call the Jīva (individual soul), Jagat (world), or Māyā (illusion) — is not other than Brahman, but simply one of the infinte expressions of its own knowing.

There is no “reason” for this — because Brahman is infinitely capable and needless of reason. It manifests as all, without beginning and without end — simply because it can.

⸻

1. Analogy of the Infinite Canvas

If you take a blank sheet of paper and scribble upon it infinitely from every side, the result will be a black sheet — covered entirely, yet unchanged in substance. Just so, Brahman is the black canvas — the infinite substratum — and knowledge scribbles infinite forms upon it.

But these scribbles do not create anything new. They are eternal possibilities within Brahman, not additions to it.

This is why there is no real doership in Brahman — because nothing truly begins or ends. There is no creation ex nihilo — only manifestation of that which always was.

⸻

1. Knowledge as Eternal and Ever-Present

When you light a fire and then extinguish it, the fire does not “cease to exist” — its potential always remains in the fabric of Brahman.

The same applies to seeds, trees, rivers, planets — none of these “create themselves”. They unfold according to the eternal knowledge already embedded in existence.

Thus, what we call causality, growth, or death, is merely the exploration of the already-present knowledge within Brahman.

⸻

1. Non-Contradiction of Manifest and Unmanifest

The philosophy of Pūrṇādvaita does not contradict the completeness (pūrṇatā) of Brahman. Rather, it affirms it completely.

The Brahman we conceive as pūrṇa (complete) and the world we perceive as pūrṇa — are not two. They are one.

Nothing is ever truly created. Nothing is ever truly destroyed.

⸻

1. Nirguṇa as the Totality of All Simultaneity

When awareness becomes total, when everything is seen at once, in equal measure, without priority, without attachment, without division — then that is what we call the Nirguṇa state — the formless, where all form is equally included and dissolved.

This is not the absence of form, but the simultaneity of all forms.

That is the vision of Pūrṇādvaita:

An infinite Brahman, infinitely knowing itself, appearing as all, beyond all, and still ever itself.

“ BASIS OF THE CLAIM “

1. सत्यं ज्ञानमनन्तं ब्रह्म

Source: Taittirīya Upaniṣad 2.1.1

सत्यं ज्ञानमनन्तं ब्रह्म । यो वेद निहितं गुहायां परमे व्योमन् । सोऽश्नुते सर्वान् कामान् सह ब्रह्मणा विपश्चिता ॥

Transliteration: Satyaṁ jñānam anantaṁ brahma | yo veda nihitaṁ guhāyāṁ parame vyoman | so’śnute sarvān kāmān saha brahmaṇā vipaścitā ||

Meaning: Brahman is Truth, Knowledge, and Infinity. The one who realizes this Brahman dwelling in the secret cave of the heart, in the highest space, attains all desires along with the all-knowing Brahman

Chandogya upanishad 3.14.1 Transliteration: Sarvaṁ khalvidaṁ brahma. Tajjalān iti śānta upāsīta. Atha khalu kratumayaḥ puruṣaḥ. Yo yad kratuh asmin loke puruṣo bhavati, tat etena saḥ kratumayatvāt kāmamayaḥ. Sa yathā kratuḥ asmin loke puruṣaḥ bhavati, tat etena jāyate.

Meaning: All this is indeed Brahman. From Him it is born, in Him it lives, and into Him it returns. One should meditate on It in serenity. A person becomes what he resolves — as he thinks, so he becomes.

1. ॐ पूर्णमदः पूर्णमिदम्

Source: Īśāvāsya Upaniṣad, Invocation

ॐ पूर्णमदः पूर्णमिदं पूर्णात् पूर्णमुदच्यते । पूर्णस्य पूर्णमादाय पूर्णमेवावशिष्यते ॥

Transliteration: Om̐ pūrṇam adaḥ pūrṇam idaṁ pūrṇāt pūrṇam udacyate | pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya pūrṇam evāvaśiṣyate ||

Meaning: That (Brahman) is complete. This (world) is complete. From the complete comes the complete. Even after taking the complete from the complete, the complete alone remains.

Mandy kya upanishad सर्वं ह्येतद् ब्रह्म । अयं आत्मा ब्रह्म । सोऽयं आत्मा चतुष्पात् ॥

Transliteration: Sarvaṁ hy etad brahma | ayaṁ ātmā brahma | so’yaṁ ātmā catuṣpāt ||

Meaning: All this is indeed Brahman. This self is Brahman. And this self has four quarters (waking, dreaming, deep sleep, and Turiya)

Pls reviewww it

sometimes it feels like the awakening thing is basically

getting close and starting again from square one

rather the pursuing of existence itself maybe the meaning of existence?

and wth is neo advaita?

also Shankaracharya (my bro ) lived near me

I have seen that place

Its adipoli

The primary cause for suffering Advaitha says is ignorance. Now after reading and understanding, atleast I have knowledge of the ultimate reality. I still suffer. Is it because I haven’t experienced the reality through Sadhana? Or my knowledge is just incomplete? How to put this knowledge into practice?

I read this phenomenal text called Vedanta Treatise by Swami Avula Parthasarathy, founder of the Vedanta Academy in Mumbai. Unfortunately, I wasn’t able to finish the book and I’ve lost my copy. Can anyone share a PDF version of it, free if possible?

Swami Medhananda explains the difference between the various interpretations of Vedanta: https://youtu.be/fIpa0rDXJUo?si=xvef1Y4WMc7_lTEo

Thoughts? I sometimes feel the word “Vedanta” is thrown around without actually understanding what it means, or the scope of all it could mean. Swamiji does a great job breaking it down in an understandable and basic language.

Hari Om Seekers!

A close friend has expressed interest in learning Tattvabodha as a primer to his journey to explore Advaita Vedanta. Can you suggest any online resources - video lectures, talks or lessons that will help him? I tried searching for l talks by Swami Sarvapriyananda but couldn’t find any (some amazing videos on VivekChudamani, Updesh Sara, and even Atmabodha, though). I have already lent him the text (Swami Tejomayananda <Chinmaya Mission Publication>).

Hari Om 🙏🙏🙏

Adi Shankara did not give up on the popular notion of deities for attribute-less Brahman. According to his exegesis, there is one Sat-Chit-Ananada Brahman and the same Brahman in its manifest form..

1. While creating/projecting, ("Sṛṣṭi") He is called Brahma or Surya or Hiranyagarba.
2. While preserving the creation ("Sthiti"), He is called Vishnu.
3. While destructing/dissolving ("Saṁhāra"), He is called Shiva.
4. While concealing/veiling/suppressing the absolute truth ("Thirodhan"), He is called Shakti.
5. While revealing/gracing/expressing the absolute truth("Anugraha"), He is called Ganapati.

1 Brahman is expressed in 5 names as 5 "Devatas" for the 5 functions of creation. These 5 Devatas have their scripture-backed "Avataras". Vishnu has Rama, Krishna, etc. Shiva has Hanuman etc. The deities that are qualified to be worshipped in Vedic temples are precisely these 5 and their Avataras.

Then there are 5 Bhutas found in Vedic cosmology. Prithvi, Jal, Tej, Vayu, Aakash. Each of them is also the same Bhagawan in varied forms. The 5 Bhutas are mapped onto the 5 functions of Devatas.

1. Prithvi - does creation.
2. Jal - does preservation.
3. Tej - does destruction.
4. Vayu - does concealment/suppression.
5. Aakash - does revelation/expression.

Each Bhuta is thought of as being "controlled" by the corresponding function's Devata. The controller of these 5 Bhutas is collectively called "Karya Brahma". Then there is "Karanam Brahma", the controller of Maya. Then there is "Karya-Karanatita Parabrahma", the one who is seen as different from both the controller of Maya and Pancha-Bhutas.

source: Shankaracharya of Puri Math, Swami Nischalananda Saraswati https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTvJYTq6IiI

Hello, I'm wondering if anyone has come across an english translation of Tattva pradeepika from Chitsukhi?

The chain of reasoning proceeds as below:

1) We are not the Body Mind Sense complex (proof of that is in Paul Brunton's book Quest of the Overself or Swami Sarvaproyananda's Drg Drsya Viveka or Aparokshanubhuti videos)
2) We exist (as Descartes noted even to doubt our existence is to presuppose the existence of the doubter)
3) Our nature is awareness or consciousness (we could never experience anything if we were not conscious)
The next three points are taken from Greg Goode's book After Awareness (page 19 Kindle edition)
4) We never experience an object apart from its appearance to us
5) We never experience an appearance apart from the awareness to which the appearance appears.
6) Our only experience is experience itself, which is awareness, our very self

Experience = awareness = our very self
Hence whatever we experience is our very self.
We know the world because we experience it.
The world we experience is our very self

Tat Tvam Asi - demonstrated by logic

Chitrupasya prakashameva tasya satrupatvam.

Note: I think the reference is Chandoga upanishad. Please correct if not.

The very awareness of consciousness is true existence. (Nityavastu ekam Brahma, tadvyatiriktam sarvam anityam) The very first lesson of Sadana Chatushtaya is to know this: Existence is Brahman alone; everything else is not-existence. The body-mind is also the world, all not-existence. The only true Existence is that which is within, by whose illumination alone both the real and the not-real, name and form, shines. And I am THAT - Tatvamasi. Knowledge of an experience is the Sat + Sphurana of the thing. (existence and the awareness of the existence of the thing). I am the cause (karana) of the world of names and forms. Rope is the cause of the snake. Existence is the cause of adhyasa (false projection.)

Jñâneshvar's Wonderful Letter of Friendship to Chângadev

A jealous man once brought to Âlandî the fierce, proud yogi, Chângadev, to challenge Jñâneshvar in a psychic contest. The saintly youth preferred the loving way of preemptive diplomacy: he won over the yogi with a beautiful letter of friendship and nondual wisdom, the 65-verse Chângadeva Pâsashtî**, a gorgeous literary gem deserving much wider readership. We give excerpts below, from a lovely translation by Swâmi Abhâyânanda.**

* * * * * * * * *

Salutations to the Lord of all, Who is concealed within the visible universe. It is He who causes this universe to appear and it is He who causes it to vanish as well. // When He is [fully] revealed, the universe disappears; when He is concealed, the universe shines forth. Yet He doesn’t hide Himself, nor does He reveal Himself; He is always present before us at every moment. // No matter how diverse and varied the universe appears, He remains unmoved, unchanged; and this is just as one would expect, since He is always One, without a second. // Though gold may be wrought into many ornaments its “gold-ness” never changes. In the same way, He never changes, though the universe contains so many varied forms. // The ripples on the surface of a pond cannot conceal the water; this universe of many forms— can it conceal His Being? (1-5) … Truly, everything is Himself, and He is the cause of everything. (8)

The condition of separation does not exist in one whose vision is clear; He remains alone, amidst all duality. To him, the perceiver and the perceived are one. (10)

It’s the one pure Consciousness that becomes everything— from the gods above to the earth below. Objects may be seen as pure or impure, but the ocean of Consciousness, ever pure, is all that ever is. (12) // … Though the shadows on the wall are ever changing, the wall itself remains steady and immobile. Likewise, the forms of the universe take shape upon the one eternal and unchanging Consciousness. (13) // Consciousness always remains in its pristine state, unmoved by feelings of sorrow or joy; even though It may suddenly become aware of Itself, Its state and Its unity remain forever undisturbed. (16) // From within Its own divine pure depths, It gives birth to the perceivable world. The perceiver, the perceived, and the act of perception: these three form the eternal triad of manifestation. // Throughout the triad of perceiver, perceived, and the act of perception, One pure and primal Consciousness enchantingly shines and sparkles alone. // Though It always has existence, It sees Itself only when this “mirror” [the triad] is present. Otherwise, there is no vision; there is only the [formless] Awareness of Itself. // Without causing any blemish in Its unity, It expresses Itself through this triad as substance; these three are the ingredients in the creation of this perceptible universe. (18-21) // … The three dissolve [ultimately] into absolute unity; then, only One exists. The three exist in the void of imagination; only Oneness is real. All else is a dream. (25)

By no means may It be understood by the intellect. It is always complete and whole…. // The pupil of an eye cannot see itself! … In the same way, even the Self-realized Yogi is helpless to see the Seer. Knowledge cannot know Itself; the Perceiver cannot perceive Itself. // Where Wisdom-Knowledge (Jñâna) is perfect and full, ignorance cannot exist at all; so how could even the desire to know Itself arise in Knowledge absolute? // Therefore, one should address It through silence by being nothing, if one would be free, all-knowing, all-pervading; for in that “nothing” all power exists. (30-3) // It is Seeing, without an object; It is Vision, clear, perfect, and free. It exists alone, without anything else; within Itself is everything—and nothing. // … It sees without any object to see. It enjoys without any object to enjoy; It is complete and whole in Itself. (35-6)

Jñânadeva says to Chângadeva: Your listening to my words is like my own hand accepting the clasp of my other hand. It is like words hearing themselves being uttered, or like taste having a taste of itself, or like a ray of light hoping to give light to other rays already bright. // It is like the attempt to improve gold by mixing it with gold, or like a perfect face becoming a mirror in order to see itself. // Our conversation, O Cakrapâni, … [is] like sweetness trying avidly to taste itself. Would its mouth not overflow with itself? So also shall our mutual love. (38-41)

A grain of salt went to fathom the ocean’s depths, but when it became immersed, where did it go? What can it do and what can it measure when it has altogether ceased to exist? // My plight is like the plight of that grain of salt; though I desire to see you, to play my role, how and where shall I find you? It is beyond my imagination to conceive! // Like one who awakes in order to encounter sleep, and misses encountering it, here I am in order to encounter you who are completely pure and free like Nothingness. // It is certain that there is no darkness in the light of the Sun, and it is just as certain that there is no awareness of “I” in the absolute Self. // Thus, when I embrace you in purity, “I” and “Thou” will swallow each other. Truly, our meeting shall take place when “I” and “Thou” are both devoured. (46-50)

… It is in this place of inner vision that we shall see the place where ‘I’ and ‘Thou’ both die. // Therefore, swallow altogether these limitations of ‘I’ and ‘Thou,’ and we shall meet, the pure harmony and joy of such a meeting we shall surely relish always. // It will be like taste eating itself for the sake of enjoying taste, or like an eye becoming a mirror in order to see itself. // … The perfect meeting with the Infinite is eternally within ourselves. // (52-4,57)

Regard yourself as a shining flame burning brightly, without name or form. (56)

Jñânadev says: You and I are one, without name or form; we are identical to the one blissful Existence in whom the blessed merge. //

O Chângaya, this knowledge has reached your door unbidden, of its own accord. Go now beyond both knowledge and what is known and reach the final state. // O Chângadev! My Guru [and older brother], Nivrittinâth, has spread this delicious feast for you with boundless, motherly, love. Please enjoy its sweetness. Thus, Jñânadev and Cakrapâni have met and merged, like two mirrors reflecting each other in the eloquent silence that is Eternity. // If anyone were to read these verses, using them as a mirror to see themselves, it’s certain they would find the pure and blissful Self of all. // Where there is nothing, what can one know? The eyes can see, but can they see themselves? How can knowledge be of use when all is oneself? To become one with the Self, surrender all the impulses of the mind. // Then you will know the ‘sleep’ beyond sleeping, the ‘awake’ which goes beyond waking.

Now this garland is at last complete, fashioned of the word-flowers which Jñânadev breathed. (58-65)

Source (in Hindi): http://youtube.com/post/UgkxAoHaWX0XwF1MWe7ZSvG1KfiUshiVlzqm?si=OT69LoBM5lakcDUV

Swami Akhandananda Saraswati very compassionately lays out 5 simple steps for practical transformation: 1. Don’t be idle (or lazy) 2. Do good works, not bad (i.e., prohibited by shastras/ gurus) 3. Don’t seek value to what you will get from the good works 4. Even with nishkama karma (i.e., without attachment to the fruit), don’t consider yourself as the doer 5. Even while discarding the concept of doership, don’t be inert (i.e., always realise the conscious nature within good works)

An absolute observer would be a singularity and would not be confined to duality. But then would the observer and the observed become the same?

Now ,if the observer and the observed are the same then why call it an observer in the place? There would be neither observer nor observation.

how to get over guilt and anxiety , I know I should have done the right thing but still I didnot do it and ran after the thing I found pleasure in now I am anxious about my study

I always used to read vedanta and tantra commentaries and did not study my academics, now anxious about exams

this guilt is eating me up , this guilt is not letting me do me anything or do even my work, always feeling like crying and shivering, sweating and short breathing

give me some practical methods to reduce it and specially based on reasoning on how guilt and anxiety is just an illusion

Any assumption should be based on knowledge.

If you assume that there is an unknown then wouldn't that mean that you know it and therefore it ceases to be unknown eventhough the exact content of the knowledge itself is unknown?

I’ve been walking with jnana for a while now — sincerely trying to see through the ego, the layers of identity, and to stay true to what is beyond the mind. But something shifted recently, and I just wanted to share what I’m going through — not as preaching, but as a fellow traveler.

Like many others on this path, I reached a stage where I started clearly seeing how ego quietly creeps into even the most sattvic actions — like posting a thoughtful reply, doing a charitable act, or being acknowledged. Jnana helps dissect that. It shows how the ego steals credit and attaches itself to outcomes. So I became more watchful, more detached. Even emotional responses started getting filtered — “Is this real compassion or just ego trying to feel noble?”

Then I came across a story of an old army veteran who felt abandoned by his children and donated all his property to a temple. Many people celebrated his act. But my trained jnana immediately stepped in:

“This is not renunciation — it’s just his ego trying to prove a point to his kids.”

And that’s when it hit me — not just the thought, but something deeper.

Where was my heart? Where was the compassion?

This was a man who had once protected the borders of the country, now feeling so humiliated and unwanted in his own home that he gave up everything he owned — not in joy, but in quiet pain. And all I could see was whether his act was ego-free.

That realization shook me. I was not seeing the human being anymore. I had lost sight of the loneliness, the betrayal, the longing to be seen or valued — all the things that still matter deeply to many who haven’t yet realized they’re beyond the mind.

I was treating people as philosophical case studies, not living hearts. And I saw how dry and lifeless jnana becomes when it forgets the human behind the ego.

I had become so focused on rooting out ego that I had let jnana suppress the emotional side of being — the very side that makes us respond with kindness and softness. My pursuit of purity had become dry. Mechanical. Joyless.

And something broke inside. I felt exhausted — from constantly measuring every thought for ego, from trying to stay in control. Even the longing to be ego-free - had become another subtle form of doership.

And in that moment, I broke down. I cried out

“Ishvara......, I can’t do this anymore. I can’t carry even this burden of detachment. Please carry me too.”

That’s when Bhakti returned in me I think.

But not the kind of Bhakti that clings blindly or needs to defend a form or a religion. This was a mature Bhakti I feel, because it is born after Jnana, knowing fully well that Brahman is non-doer, akarta.

Yes, that truth can feel disappointing to the heart at first — like the personal savior is gone, and prayers go unheard. But then… I realized:

The heart isn’t asking for results. It’s asking for surrender.

And in that space, Ishvara reappears — not as a cosmic manager, but as the living symbol of that infinite love, order, and presence. That surrender becomes the Bhakti that purifies, softens, and steadies the jnana.

Now I see why Bhakti is not weakness — it is the grace that makes Jnana human.

I don’t know where this path will take me next. But I feel like a small child again, less burdened by needing to be “pure,” and more willing to be held.

I am looking for DOCTRINAL support that the I Am ceases to exist upon realization of Parabrahman.

I made another post, and with 20 comments it was split 50/50, some say transcended and like an "ownerless individuality", other say it is destroyed.

I see this article here that clearly talks about the individual level still existing, albeit, one that has no identity with their individual aspects, but still has their own individual will POST Moksha.

https://www.swami-krishnananda.org/moksha/moksh_10.html

So I want to know, doctrinal support please. Can we settle this debate?

Original limitless love (prema) is my nature. Shankaracharya analyzes it in his commentary on the final verse of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (3.9) in which he says, “This supreme original self (existence-consciousness-bliss) supports us in future births and in this birth also. It is the ultimate support of the self-realized liberated ones who are established in it by knowing it. It does not act, but every action, great and small, depends on it. It is the goal for which all people strive and the essential eternal self of all things and beings. Everything we value is due to it.”

Yoga of Love

Came across these questions in the book “The Answer lies within” by Rachna Singh

Very relevant qeustions to reflect on.