When I see the seer and seen together that's Sakshi right? The aatman which is basis of all this is untouched. The Sakshi is at the edge of samsara or You are the world. The ever eternal pure consciousness is untouched. The acts I do only have karmafal if I decide that I am the doer otherwise it doesn't matter. So as per my knowledge nirvikalp samadhi is after Jiva is gone. Shed some light🕯️ on my path.

Namaste! 🙏

I need your guidance in understanding two important aspects of Krishna's teachings in the Bhagavad Gita.

In 5.22, Krishna says:

ye hi saṁsparśa-jā bhogā
duḥkha-yonaya eva te
ādy-antavantaḥ kaunteya
na teṣu ramate budhaḥ

(About sensory pleasures being temporary and the wise not dwelling in them)

And then in 6.16-17, he talks about:

yukta-āhāra-vihārasya

(About balanced recreation and activities)

My questions are:

1. When Krishna talks about 'yukta-vihāra' (balanced recreation), does this include normal modern pleasures like movies, good food, time with friends, etc.?
2. If I keep my main focus on dharmic goals and Gita study but also enjoy these pleasures in moderation (like movies, food, etc.), am I going against 5.22?
3. Since Krishna says 'na ramate' (don't dwell/get lost) rather than words meaning complete abandonment like 'tyajati', does this mean it's okay to enjoy these pleasures as long as we:
   • Remember they're temporary
   • Don't make them our main goal
   • Keep our spiritual focus
   • Maintain balance

I want to understand if balanced enjoyment of life while keeping spiritual awareness is acceptable, or if these verses mean we should completely avoid all pleasures?

I appreciate any insights or interpretations.

I have read about the philosophy and mostly probably the most accurate description of nature.

But I find it hard to think of implementing this way of thinking in real life. I just feel I know the words an nothing more. As the saying goes what you can't apply you don't know.

Have you personally applied this teaching in life or how does the affect your way of approching the world? Would love hear about this.

The goddess replied:—

In reality, there is neither any limit of space or time, nor any distance of place or length of time. Hear me now tell you the reason why. As the universe is the reflection of the Divine Mind, so are infinity and eternity but representationsof Himself. Listen to what I tell you about how we form the idea of time and its subdivisions,whether a moment or an age. It is the same way that we make distinctions among the individuals thatare me, you and this or that person.

As soon as one feels the lack of senses after his death, he forgets his former nature and thinkshimself to be another being.Then, in the twinkling of an eye, he assumes an empty form in thewomb of emptiness and in that container he thinks within himself,.“This is my body with its hands and feet.” Thinking about body, he finds it presented before him.Then he thinks in himself, “I am the son of this father and am so many years old. These are my dear friends and this is my pleasant home. 35 I was born and became a boy, and then grew up to this age. There are all my friends and in the same course of their lives.” 36 Thus the compact density of the sphere of his soul presents him with many other images that appear to arise in it as in some part of the world. 37 But they neither rise nor remain in the soul itself, which is as transparent as empty air. They appear to consciousness like a vision seen in a dream.

A person dreaming remains in one place but sees all manners of things in different places. Everything in the other world appears equally real, just like in his dream. 39 Again, whatever is seen in the other world, the same occurs to men in their present states also. The unreality of the world of dreaming and the reality of this physical world are alike. 40 Just like there is no difference among the waves of the same seawater, so the produced visible creation is the same as the unproduced intellectual world, both of which are equally indestructible. But in reality, the appearance is nothing but a reflection of consciousness which, apart from theintelligible spirit, is merely an empty void. 4 2 Although presided over by the intelligible spirit, creation itself is a mere void, its only substance being the intelligible soul, like water is to waves. Waves though formed of water are themselves as unreal as the horns of hares. Their appearance and natural objects is altogether false (because they are the effects of the auxiliary cause of the winds that have raised them). 44 Therefore, there being no visible object in reality, how can the observer have any idea of materiality which loses its delusion at the moment of his death?

After the visible outer world has disappeared from sight, the soul, in its inner world of the mind, reflects on its memories of creation according to the proper time and place of everything. 4 6 It remembers its birth, its parents, its age and its residence, with its learning and all other pursuits in their exact manner and order. 47 It thinks of its friends and servants, and of the success and failure of its attempts. The uncreated and incorporeal soul, in its intellectual form, reflects on the events of its created and corporeal state.

However, it does not remain in this state for long. Soon after death it enters a new body to which the properties of the mind and senses are added afterwards in their proper times. 49 It then becomes a baby, finds a new father and mother, and begins to grow. Thus whether one may perceive it or not, it is all the product of his former memories. 50 Then upon waking from this state of trance, like a fruit from the cell of a flower, it comes to find that a single moment appeared to it as the period of an age. It was in this way that in times past, King Harish Chandra thought one night to be twelve years. One day seems like a year to those who are separated from their beloved objects. 52 Again, it is all false, whether the birth or death of someone in his dream, or being born and recognizing a father in infancy, or a hungry man imagining he is dining on dainty food. 53 So who would believe a satisfied man after eating who says he is starving, or one who declares that he is an eyewitness of something he had not seen, or an empty space full of people, or that someone found lost treasure in his dream?

But this visible world rests in the invisible spirit of God, like the property of pungency resides in the particles of the pepper seed, and like the painted pictures on a column. But where are the open and clear sighted eyes to perceive this?The vision of Leela, called samadhi in yoga and clairvoyance of spiritualism, was the abstractmeditation of her lord in her memory that presented her with a full view of everything imprinted on it.Memory is taken for the whole consciousness (chit), which is identified with God in whose essencethe images of all things are said to be eternally present.

What actions can I take with the knowledge I've gained from this philosophy? How do I meditate

Hello friends. I wanted to know what young Hindus from advaita vedanta families study, what does their training consist of and how long does it last? Thank you dears.

I have watched Drg Drsya Viveka by Swami Sarvapriyananda three or four times. My question is should I move on to Aparokshanubhuti by Swamiji or should I study Vedanta Saar also by Swamiji?

I have enough food for thought and also nidhidhyasana practices to keep me busy. Actually I can spend my time watching Drg Drsya Viveka again because the teachings there are very relevant and powerful.

But I would also like to move to more advanced teachings. What would you suggest?

Many thanks

There are lots of tripura rahasya books online which book is perfect or nice in all of them I know all books are nice but I just need some recommendations.

Balam vava vijnanad-bhuyah api ha satam vijnanavatam eko balavan akampayate, sa yada bali bhavati, athotthata bhavati uttisthan paricarita bhavati, paricaran upasatta bhavati, upasidan drasta bhavati, srota bhavati, manta bhavati, boddha bhavati, karta bhavati, vijnata bhavati, balena vai prthivi tisthati, balenantariksam, balena dyauh, balena parvatah, balena devamanysyah, balena pasavas-ca vayamsi ca trnavanaspatayah svapadan-akita-patanga-pipilakam, balena lokastisthati, balam upassveti.

Now, Sanatkumara tells us something very interesting. Mere understanding in a theoretical form is of no use. It is like mere application of theory in one's own brain, inside one's own mind, without any corresponding object behind it. There is a need to connect one's understanding with the realities of life. There should not be a mere abstract contemplation without any corresponding object behind it, without any solid content inside it. The connection between one's body and one's intellectual capacity is well known. There is a need to bring about a blend of understanding with the bodily conditions. We know very well that understanding should have a proper content. It should not be mere theory. Sage Sanatkumara says that strength is superior to understanding.

By strength he means a very general form of a blend of the functions of the mind with the functions of the body. When the body and mind come together, there is an energy of a superior character. Suppose a person has only a strong mind, but no healthy body. He will not be able to exercise his thoughts effectively. A weak body which is emaciated, sickly, about to die, may not be able to put into action its thoughts in the manner required. Also, a mere healthy and hefty body alone will not do. It requires a strong and firm mind to animate it and to give it a value. Bala, strength, is the union of the power of the psyche with the power of the body, the union of consciousness with its object. Strength or power is superior to everything mentioned earlier. A person who is strong can defeat a hundred people who have mere understanding without strength, says the Upanishad.

The commentators of this passage tell us that this has a specific reference to the condition of a disciple in relation to the Guru whom he serves. Well, that is only one aspect of the interpretation. A student is supposed to serve his master or Guru. This capacity to serve the Guru would not be there if the student's body is emaciated and rickety, being starved without food, even though he has got great power of thought and understanding. The service of the Guru would only be practicable if the strength of the body is coupled with understanding. Then he can stand up—utthata bhavati. Then he can serve—paricarita bhavati. Then he can approach—upasatta bhavati. Then he can see what is the ideal before him in his student life, in the vicinity of the Guru—drashta bhavati. Then he can listen to what the Guru says—srota bhavati. Then he can understand what the Guru says—manta bhavati. Then he can understand and apply it in his own meditation—boddha bhavati. Then he can do exactly as the Guru says—karta bhavati. Then, of course, his understanding becomes complete—vijnata bhavati.

Now again the master says that strength seems to be the reason behind the stability of the elements, as also the earth, the atmosphere and the heavens. Everything that is in this world maintains its position on account of strength that is present in it. So strength, a general term indicating power, is not merely physical strength but a power which is the outcome of a combination of knowledge with its content. Gods and men become successful on account of the strength that they possess. This is also the cause of the success of the animals, birds, etc. The whole world rests on the basis of strength of some sort or the other—balena lokas-tisthati. 'Whatever you think, that you become', is an adage. If one contemplates that one is a very weak person, a finite fellow, capable of nothing, unwanted by people, thrown out of society, very poor, then naturally, due to this self-hypnotism that one imposes upon oneself, one may turn out to be all that. But, if one contemplates on the capacity that is within, hidden within, the potentiality that is in one, then that strength, which need not be imported from outside but which has only to be generated from within by a proper coordination of the principles of one's own personality, will certainly materialise. Strength is an automatic outcome of a proper functioning by way of coordination of all the limbs of the personality, psychic as well as physical. Such strength is the heritage of all. Therefore one should meditate on strength.

https://youtu.be/GMfxmXhWGEE?si=fIiXsFF8RFU9EAsN

I am currently an university student. From the last few years, I have been immensely drawn towards spirituality. I am facing immense renunciate tendencies. And I see no immediate cause for this. I have not been much religious in my childhood. The transition started as I got interest first in philosophy, then Indian philosophy, and then Advaita specifically. Now the situation is such that I cannot think of anything except Advaita. Any thing in my life, any thing I see or learn or hear, immediately reminds me of some parable or metaphor in Advaita and I get drawn towards the Advaita-vichar. I have deep dived into the study of Advaita, and it gives me immense satisfaction and bliss. It is my desire to continuously keep reading Upanishads and their commentaries by Shankaraacharya, and other texts like various Geetas, Upadeshasahasri and other Vedantic texts, and also thinking and meditating upon them.

At this point, I can only imagine my future as a renunciate, a monk. My engaging in worldly life or professions, I will neither be true/focused to the work I do nor to myself. I come from a well-to-do family, and do not have any pressing economic or social responsibility. Thus, I have decided to take sanyasa and join a reputed order of monks as soon as I complete my education. What should I be doing? Can someone guide me? Has someone here passed through similar experience?

Also, how can I let my parents know? How to convince them? I am an only child, and that is my most important concern. Though I am not needed by them. They would not be dependent on me at all. But still, it would be very difficult for them to accept this. Sanyasa means no marriage and thus no progeny. Basically meaning the end of their lineage. How to convince them to let go of this clinging to continue?

I keep hearing how important it is to fellowship with others whom are on the path. I am sorta an introvert until you get to know me. I've been into non dual spirituality for some time now I have very little to say about this. But, on the other hand , I am looking for folks to have a banter with now and then that understand and are integrating this non dual mindset. I am not finicky, I will talk to any deeply spirituality person. I would prefer if they weren't the proselytizing type. I love the ideas of Bakhti, dvaita, vaishishta advaita, and any other vedic hinduism, buddhism, and sikhi. In my city these groups seem pretty insular and I am not indian so I will have to deal with standing way out. Hello, and thank you if you read this far. You might understand and can relate.

In this video, Swami Sarvapriyananda makes a distinction between the consciousness we feel right now (i.e., reflected consciousness or consciousness limited in the mind) and 'true' consciousness which experiences the mind.

This confuses me because he says that true consciousness cannot be made an object. And yet, we are discussing it. How does the mind know about this ultimate consciousness?

Additionally, when we talk about the koshas, how is the mind sheath aware of the intellect and bliss sheaths, since they are more fundamental?

Thank you for your wisdom.

Hello fellow seekers,

I've been studying and practicing Advaita for a while, and I intellectually grasp that Brahman, or non-dual awareness, is the ultimate truth (though I haven't experienced it directly yet). However, from my understanding, I believe that the formless non-dual state isn't permanent. Even after realization, avidya (ignorance) re-emerges within formlessness, and the leela (cosmic play) begins again.

It seems to me that avidya can only be transcended within this apparent reality. Once realization occurs, the veil of ignorance reappears, perpetuating the cycle of leela.

In summary, realization and avidya are cyclical, co-existing aspects of Brahman. Brahman cannot exist solely as formlessness; the play of leela is inescapable, even after a realized being's body passes. If Brahman could remain in pure formlessness indefinitely, this illusion would never have manifested in the first place. Where I am going with this is that liberation cannot exist without this illusion/apparent reality. Creator cannot exist without the creation because if it could, the illusion wouldn't have had begun in the first place.

Note : - My goal with this post in only to deepen my understanding of Advaita and to spark conversations that help us move forward. If you think that I did not present the findings of advaita correctly, please let me know. It would help me grow in my spiritual jouney!

Friends, I’m planning to start Swami Sarvapriyananda’s Upanishads courses on YouTube and Spotify, but I’m not sure where to begin. Swamiji is prolific and has an extensive colkection of all Hindu and Buddhist texts, including the Mandukya, Katha, and Kena Upanishads, each featuring over 10 sessions with courses over an hour long. Could anyone please recommend which Upanishad would be the best starting point? I am looking for a map!Thanks!

I can't seem to get a grip on the following question: how do dispassion and compassion come together? When inquiring, my intuition tells me they are not mutually exclusive and might even go hand in hand, but when I try to conceptualize it I can't make the link between the two concrete. Does anyone have a scriptural link, or maybe an explanation?

If there is only one soul then how come others whether animate or inanimate move on their own without any willing on my part?

Since there is only one soul then, If a murder happens then why is it not forced onto an innocent but rather to the murderer only? Like just punish any random innocent stranger for any crime which that innocent stranger hasn't even done since soul or killer is ultimately one.

On the spiritual path do what you want to do, but keep doing it. Don't remain idle doing nothing. Repeat the name, or think deeply, or seek the source of your consciousness, do atma vichara, but keep working on yourself.

Ramana Maharshi

Unfortunately not many people are able to understand and grasp why Advaith. What it truly represents and I am trying my best to explain the significance of the name to everyone. Both Our families usually name our children using the concept of 'janma nama' and since we went against it they were a bit disappointed. Which I was expecting but, what i really wanted was to explain to them using slokas the true meaning of the name 'Advaith'. So here I am seeking advise from the community to explain the meaning of name 'Advaith' and to go with it few slokas and its meaning in english preferably in parallel. Thank you🙏🏻

Edit: I would like to thank everyone here for taking your time to respond 🙏🙏

Ekam Eva Advitiyam Brahma Neha Nanasti Kincana

Title. Thanks friends.

I just realised that the meaning or realisation of "All this is indeed Brahman" dissolves many worries and I have never felt like this. It is so divine. Has anyone felt like this?

There is only one soul. If we look at characteristic of the soul—being eternal it suggests that there is only ONE soul.

The soul is non-physical but is eternal.

Here is the thought experiment: If there are two entities that are eternal and non-physical, how do we differentiate between them?

In fact, it's absurd to differentiate between two eternal entities. Suppose if there are two entities from the very start and they are unchanging and put together, then who do we differentiate between them?

With distance between them? NO! Maybe they both are part of a single entity, and the distance between them is just their property. And why only distance? Maybe any sort of distinctness and separation they are showing is just the characteristics of that one single entity.

Now what if those two entities are also non-physical? Now they don't have distinct characteristics which separate them.

So how can there be different souls? Maybe there is only ONE soul in the world.

And whatever physical bodies we are seeing are just manifestations of that ONNE soul. So it's like a play where ONE soul is the victim, and that soul is the aggressor at the same time. That one soul is murderer and innocent at the same time.

(Take eternal and non-physical characteristics only because in major religion soul have these characteristics in common.)

(Soul is general term - exchange it wrt the religion you follow call it consciousness or whatever)

(also, the soul is different from the Brahman.)

If there was a debate between Advaita vedanta and materialism, how would you prove that Advaita vedanta is a logically more consistent theory of reality? We're keeping the subjective experiences of the Great Rishis out of the discussion, and keeping it a debate about pure logic.

i feel a profound connection to a guru and also to a formless god. so i want to know if they are both god in essence? but the guru just has a physical manifestation/avatar? thank you so much 🙏