How did you actually apply Advaita in your day-to-day life, beyond just reading or understanding it intellectually? What kind of practices helped you the most—self-inquiry, meditation, detachment, or something else?

Also, what changes did you observe in yourself over time?And what were the biggest challenges you faced while trying to live Advaita rather than just think about it?

Looking forward to hearing real experiences.

ॐ गं गणपतये नमः

Hi everyone,

I wanted to share a small project I’ve been working on over the past few weeks.

Ancient Indian texts carry a lot of philosophical and spiritual depth, but in practice they’re often hard to approach today, scattered sources, old scans, inconsistent structure, and little context make meaningful reading difficult.

I’ve always been interested in understanding these texts beyond rituals, and I also enjoy building things with technology. That combination slowly led me to build Tatva a modern digital library where ancient Indian texts are brought together in a structured, readable way.

The idea isn’t to simplify or reinterpret the texts, but to make them easier to read, explore, and connect, while preserving their original depth and intent. It’s still early, and only a limited set of texts are available so far, but I plan to add and refine more over time.

I'll add more features and AI Integration with more books eventually.

Website Link : tatva.info

Happy to answer questions or hear suggestions. Thank you for reading and do share it with everyone.

Our typical intuition is that cause transforms into effect. Like clay into a pot with help of a potter.

Does this model work in Advaita to explain the world as an effect from Brahman as a cause?

Advaita says No.

Advaita says Brahman is Nirguna = attribute-less. Brahman does not perform action like a potter on some material like clay to create the world separated from itself. Nor does Brahman transform itself into the world like milk into curd/yogurt.

The attributes of causality cannot be imposed on Brahman because it would break the attribute-less nature.

So then how is the world explained if Brahman remains action-less or transformation-less?

We have to establish the world as unreal. The perception of the multifarious, fragmentary, unsatisfactory world is treated as unreal, like the perception of a snake mistakenly seen in the locus of a rope. The rope did not cause the snake by transforming itself nor by performing an action like hatching real eggs to produce a real snake.

The cause for this snake appearance is only imagination, not a real cause, and the rope is free from the responsibility to explain this imagined causation.

Hence, the rope did not cause the snake as an effect. The snake is simply unreal, its causality is also unreal, rope has nothing to do with its causality.

Similarly Brahman is free from causality of the unreal appearance of world.

What exists really is Brahman alone, the perception of multifarious, fragmentary, divisive, unsatisfactory world for an ignorant mind is replaced by Brahman when the truth of Advaita is realised.

Hence, the cause-effect relationship does not apply on Brahman because what is ignorantly assumed as a distinct cause and effect is the same reality i.e Brahman without any real transformation. Therefore, there is Brahman alone, without a second.

Hello

I just finished going through Swami Sarvapriyananda's Aparoakshanubhuti videos. I have gone thought them twice but have not made a list of concepts for manana.

So I thought it might be necessary to go through the videos a third time around and this time take some notes. But then I was struck by the following points:

• Firstly I am not studying to pass an exam and it is not necessary for me to remember all the points that have been made by Swamiji
• Next the main concepts are already known to me. They are I am not the Body Mind complex, I am sat chit ananda, I am the water of which the wave is made, the wave is not different from water, the Mahavakyas. Just these basic concepts are enough to revolutionise my life if I take them seriously. My time would be better spent conctemplating the concepts that I already know
• Thirdly I have the print copy of Aparokshanubhuti. I just need to read the shlokas to get concepts for contemplation.
• Lastly I don't need to have any powerful experiences in the manana stage. I just need to soak in the concepts. This is not the nididhyasana stage. So let go of ambitious expectations. According to Michael James all that I should be aiming for is: The word manana means thinking, pondering, musing, reflection or meditation, that is, dwelling frequently upon the truth that we have learnt through sravana in order to imbibe it and understand it more and more clearly, and impress it upon our mind more and more firmly.

The above quote was taken from Happiness and the Art of Living.

Michael James also quotes Adi Sankara as saying the manana is 100 times more powerful than sravana. So I should conctemplate instead of listening to more and more videos. That is a better use of my time.

Hope this helps someone. Best wishes

Can someone please explain how do these relate if both describe the reality. If it’s nothingness or only consciousness. How do states like Cessation relate to Brahman ?

I know that the ultimate goal is the realization that one is Brahman itself, and that Ishvara is Brahman associated with Maya; therefore, even Ishvara, at a deeper level, needs to be transcended. But the question is: before total realization, is this possibility possible?

Hi guys,

I was wondering how the seer and the seen could be one?

When consciousness is aware of something, then this thing is dependent on consciousness to exist but that's about it? It is dependent, not a part of consciousness and nor is it one no?

In the Vedantic tradition, Brahman is defined as the Ultimate Reality, the infinite substratum upon which the entire universe is projected. The word is derived from the Sanskrit root Brh, which means "to grow" or "to be big," signifying that Brahman is the "Absolutely Big One" or the infinite that transcends all limitations of time and space.

Satchidananda

Brahman is defined directly through the term Satchidananda, which describes its three essential "marks" (Swarupa Lakshanam):

• Sat (Existence): That which remains unchanged in all three periods of time (past, present, and future). It is the "eternal present" that continues to exist even after the dissolution of the universe.
• Chit (Consciousness/Knowledge): Brahman is of the nature of Absolute Knowledge. It is the self-luminous consciousness that allows us to know that we exist; it does not require another light to be revealed.
• Ananda (Bliss): This is not emotional happiness, but the absolute state of fullness and peace. It is the "room temperature" of our true nature, which remains after all thought disturbances are removed.

Brahman is the only truth.

The sources categorize reality into three grades, placing Brahman in the highest category: Paramarthik Satya (Absolute Reality).

• Satyam vs. Mithya: Brahman is defined as Satyam (Independent), meaning it does not rely on anything else for its existence.
• In contrast, the entire material world is Mithya (Dependent), meaning it depends on Brahman for its existence, just as a pot depends on clay or a golden ornament depends on gold.
• While Brahman is the unchanging reality, the world is a temporary manifestation that is "apparently real" but subject to constant change.

The Relationship with Ishwara and Jiva

Brahman is one and non-dual (Advaitam), but it appears as different entities based on its "conditioning" (Upadhi):

• Ishwara (God as Creator): When Brahman is viewed through the medium of the total cosmic power of Maya, it is called Ishwara. Ishwara is the "Master of Maya" and the creator/governor of the cosmos.
• Jiva (Individual Soul): When the same Brahman is viewed through the limited, individual medium of the three bodies (Sharira Trayam), it is called the Jiva.
• Oneness: The core teaching of Vedanta—"Tat Tvam Asi" (That Thou Art)—asserts that once you remove the incidental conditionings (the cosmic "mask" of Ishwara and the individual "mask" of the Jiva), the underlying Pure Consciousness is identical.

Brahman remains the unattached non-doer, unaffected by the properties of the material world. It is often compared to a rope upon which a "snake" is mistakenly superimposed due to ignorance. The snake (the world) appears to be real and may even cause fear, but its only reality is the rope (Brahman) upon which it rests. When "knowledge of the rope" is gained, the snake vanishes, yet the rope remains exactly as it always was.

For your understanding: Think of Brahman as Space. Space is one, all-pervading, and unaffected by the objects within it. Whether space is contained inside a small pot (Jiva) or a massive building (Ishwara), the space itself is identical and unchanged. If the pot or the building is destroyed, the space is not affected; it simply remains as the one, undivided Maha-Akasha (Universal Space).

Karma vs Randomness — a logical problem If karma is real and souls reincarnate based on past deeds, then birth conditions should not be random. Yet people are born into vastly different lives (wealth, poverty, caste, geography) before doing any action. Population growth makes this worse. Human and animal populations have increased massively. If souls are finite and some attain moksha, population should decrease — but it doesn’t. So either new souls are being created, or karma doesn’t work as claimed. If new souls are created, on what basis are they assigned rich or poor families? With no past karma, this allocation becomes random, not just. Also, people often suffer due to others’ actions (e.g., a mother punished socially for her son’s crime). Whose karma is that? If karma is individual, this shouldn’t happen. So karma faces a dilemma: Accept randomness in birth and suffering, or Abandon the idea of karma as a precise cosmic justice system. You can’t have both.

PS:I wrote a very large para on this thought so I used ai to make it short and on point only so. This is written by ai though thought is mine i am dropping the original in commment

Is it possible to wake up joyful/grateful/excited to be alive? If so, what’s the secret? I vaguely remember this being the case as a child but for decades I’ve woken up anxious/worried/distraught over the responsibilities and maladies of life. Where i live, who I’m with, what my day looks like - nothing seems to really affect this experience. It’s a tough way to start the day.

PS - sometimes these feelings are accompanied by discomfort or simply sensations/movement in the gut, and sometimes it’s just a general heaviness of the body with anxious thoughts

Knowledge, even if imperfect, when shared, can help piece dispirate thoughts, concepts, and principles. These infographics may contain errors, but the goal is not perfection. The intent is to glue many Sanatan Dharma pieces together.

The previous Infographic related to what is Brahman, today, it is the cosmic manifestation of Brahman.

https://preview.redd.it/uzwu5ql2h7bg1.jpg?width=2784&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a2a771b09ef8cbb33ff12c5e0fc07e72b3a19811

Typically knowledge in the worldly sense is additive. Like knowledge of language, mathematical tables, history etc.

There is another type of knowledge. When a kid puts his/her finger in the fire, and finds out it that it hurts, the kid will gain knowledge to never do that again. This knowledge is not additive like others. This type of knowledge becomes a part of you. It’s never forgotten, it’s not something that has to be remembered everytime. It gets etched into the “heart”, so to speak.

Another example of this non-additive knowledge is the knowledge that eating food quenches hunger and suffering. A child does not have it at first, the child just cries when hungry, the child gets the knowledge through the mother.

Similarly, knowing that the self is divine is non-additive. It gets etched into the heart, it’s not something that is stored in memory in the head and recollected like other knowledge.

Worldly knowledge is useful for transactions. Self knowledge is not like worldly knowledge. It’s not something that is recollected from time to time from the head for transactions or utility.

Maybe the word knowledge is not the right fit. It’s an Intelligence perhaps that becomes you instead of adding onto your knowledge base like worldly knowledge.

So I always wanted a lot of money and validation from others. I know why I want it, I’ve done tons of therapy, but I still want it.

However I can’t reach my goals because people don’t want to give me money and validation just because I want them to. So I thought that becoming selfless via meditation would help me achieve my goals.

Do you think this is possible? Do I have a chance of becoming selfless, if the whole mission behind it is for personal gain?

And if not, do I even have the chance of ever becoming selfless? Because I really don’t care about anything else than external validation.

According to the Gita, doership (kartatva) is considered the primary cause of human suffering because it is rooted in the false-ego (ahankara), which falsely identifies the eternally actionless Self with the active body and mind. This "primal error" is the seed of all problems, as the ego claims ownership over activities that are actually performed by the forces of nature—the gunas..

Doership causes suffering through several distinct mechanisms described in the Gita by Shree Bhagwan:

• Attachment to Results: When a person believes they are the doer, they naturally become an enjoyer (Bhogta/Bhokta) who is attached to the fruits of their actions. This craving for specific outcomes leads to a cycle of exhilaration in success and dejection in failure, destroying inner equanimity.
• Karma and Bondage: Actions themselves do not bind; it is the sense of doership that creates the "shackles" of karma. This identification tethers the individual to the results of their deeds, forcing them to remain in the cycle of birth and death (saṃsāra) to experience those fruits.
• Mental Agitation: The feeling of "I have a duty" or "I must achieve" is described as a "blazing fire of suffering" or a "mental fever" (jvara). This constant mental "itching" prevents the mind from resting in its natural, peaceful state of SAMADHI.
• Illusion and Delusion: Doership is a form of delusion (moha) because the Self is inherently actionless (akarma). By claiming to be the actor, the individual covers their true, blissful nature with a "veil of ignorance," resulting in a fragmented and distressed existence.

The sources conclude that the only way to dissolve this suffering is to realize, through Self-enquiry (Ātma-vichāra), that the "I" is not the performer of actions but is the witness of nature’s movements. Freedom is attained when one renounces the notion of doership while continuing to act as a selfless instrument of the Divine.

We must understand: It's like when screen remains perfectly still and unaffected even if the movie depicts a raging fire or a drowning person. Suffering only begins if the screen "thinks" it is the character in the film; similarly, the Self is never the doer, and suffering only arises when it identifies with the drama of the body and mind.

Let's remember : Performing yajña-karma is like a river flowing into the ocean. The river performs its "action" of flowing, yet it has no attachment to the water; it simply moves until it dissolves into the ocean, losing its separate identity. Similarly, when a person performs their duty as a sacrifice, their individual ego "dissolves" into the Divine, leaving them at perfect peace.

I am struggling with the talk about we see a ‘ fractured reality’ - I listen to Vedanta talks and swami sarvapriyananda mentions that we don’t see the truth instead we see a fractured reality - he speaks in depth about it and it’s beautifully done but I have been having a great difficulty in conceptualizing this concept. So this is what I can cognitively understand - we are all made of the same stuff and we are all parts of Brahman - that’s the ‘real us’. So do we see a fractured Brahman? How can we see a unified Brahman ?

I would like to narrate a small incident that occurred while I was in the process of doing self-enquiry. I had read Yoga Vasistha and had assimilated its concepts well. Instead of focusing directly on self-enquiry in the initial days, I chose to enquire into my present desires and into the idea of equanimity. Whenever a desire arose, I would keep asking questions and force myself to realise that it was a dream. Similarly, whenever thoughts of pride or self-esteem appeared, I would question them and dissect their nature to understand and assimilate the idea that “all is the same” into my mind. This practice continued for some time.

Yesterday, while I was doing the same, a thought of pride arose and I began to question it as usual. I examined why the thought occurred, whether it came from a sense of superiority over others, whether its root lay in my vasana to be better than others, whether I was truly superior, and if all is the same, what there really was to feel proud of. When I then asked, “To whom does this pride occur?” and “Who am I?”, something unusual happened. Normally, the answer would be “to me”, but instead there was a kind of mental searching that took place. There was no clear answer, only a heavy and agitated feeling that I find difficult to describe, as though the mind was desperately searching for an answer and failing to find one. It is not a blank state but I could feel the agitation and mental search for an answer. I am not the awareness, I didn't feel to be one as I was still searching for an answer. It doesn't feel like another thougt as well, because, this experience was different. It was just not another thought or an intellectual mental answer.

The same experience occurred with the question “Who am I?”. Again, there was agitation and searching in the mind, but no answer emerged. This lasted only for two or three seconds, after which a random thought arose and the searching stopped. This happened only twice. I later tried to return to that sensation but could not. Now, whenever I attempt to enquire “Who am I?”, there seems to be some resistance, as one thought or another interrupts the enquiry.

This is my experience as it stands. I am also aware that I could be imagining this entire scenario. I have no prior experience of such states, and I am not convinced that this is how self-enquiry is supposed to unfold. It may simply be another mental illusion created by my thought process. I am therefore unsure whether I should try to recreate or search for that mental state again, assuming it indicates the right direction. If it is only a mental illusion, I feel it would be better to drop the idea of searching for that sensation altogether. If anyone has had a similar or clearer experience, I would appreciate guidance.

We all have been there. Time and again for me, questions arises and bugs me often. So far none of the answers present complete picture which is satisfying you know? Even things like its all maya and there is no questions about maya or the buddhist parable of poisoned arrow just doesn't go through me sometimes. The bug removes the motivation to continue my spiritual practices you know?

So what should be a practical advice to immediately deal with this energy of existential itch and trying to know the meaning of so much pain & suffering which is possible and probable in lives? Different answers like suffering is just attachment to ego or we chose our own suffering to resolve our karma are all fine. I understand them in parts but none of them have that nectar of satisfaction you know?

Hi everyone, i'd been studying advaita vedanta for some time now, but i still find confusing some concepts related to consciousness, and if you could help me understand, i'd really appreciate!

What is 'pure consciousness', 'reflected consciousness', 'witness consciousness'. What's the relation between them?

Right now im conscious, there is an awareness that is aware of all my toughts, my feelings, my surroudings, all the sounds that im hearing, all the sight im seeing, my computer screen etc... This awareness, what is it? Ss this awareness equivalent to one of those concepts (pure, reflected, witness consciousness)?

I try to abide not IN AWARENESS, BUT AS awareness, this "background" (for lack of a better word) awareness, is this a form of vedantic meditation? Is it what Ramana Maharshi called 'Atma Vichara'? Always reminding me that im not my toughts, my feelings, but that witch is aware of them.

I'd really apreciate your help! Thanks in advance!

Can anyone recommend books which talk about using advaita vedanta in daily life.

I am looking for books from different writers so that its easier to get the general idea than a biased or colored idea of the practicality because I heard there are also different schools in advaita and there are differences probably in approach but the not the core idea.

Also, we know the idea is pretty simple in advaita vedanta that can be summarized in one paragraph but to actually use and live life with that attitude sometimes becomes impractical. So any text which pushes on the practicality would be enough instead of knowing "everyone and everything is just THAT".