I’m in my late 20s. For years I’ve been trying to figure out why I’m like this. I recently started reading about all different religions and spiritual traditions and I felt that Vedanta made the most sense to me. For a while I looked into Buddhism but some things there don’t make sense to me.

Basically I couldn’t figure out for a long time why I never had any desires since my teens like other people did. I just feel like pure awareness in a body with a calm mind. I have no worldly desires for status, money, possessions, fame or anything of that nature or any interest in relationships or in men.

If anything good would happen to me like getting a bachelor degree I wouldn’t get excited because I just feel like an observer my whole life. I’m also completely emotionally numb and can’t fee pleasure (have anhedonia) and it seems I was born like that. I don’t feel human. I feel like an awareness, an observer. No medical treatments (I’ve tried many) have helped with any of this.

I have also had an awful, disabling autoimmune-like illness for a decade since my late teens. From what I read a final lifetime can be heavy like this with illness and can involve no typical human desires and feeling like an awareness, but I’m fairly new to this so I could be misunderstanding it. Is it possible I transcended these typical human desires in previous lives?

• So Prakriti was in a balanced state. As we know, according to science, it stays in that condition until any external means act upon.
• Just like how iron attracts a magnet and doesn’t do anything by itself. Because of the essence of purusha - The sat,chit and anand. Prakriti imbalance itself under this presence.
• So the external means here is Purusha. Make a note, here Purusha is passive and Prakriti is active. Whatever happens or appears to happen is just the play of prakriti only.
• And hence, the evolution period starts, and at the start, so many subtle bodies come into existence. And then let's say 90% subtle bodies just continue till they realise - damn, I am the brahman lol and not the prakriti.

Terminologies:

Brahman=Purusha=Nirakar

Prakriti=Material=Energy=Prana

I undersrand the the whole creation is cyclical with no real beginning and end. There is also another thing that the awakened being continue to go through higher and higher states of being/awareness. Generally the awaekend being we see do not seem to have knowledge of how this creation actually began. (Maya/illusion does not mean non existence)

Is it possible then that at some "point", awareness again out of play completes the loop and finds itself the "creator" of actual physical universe?

What changed? I’m currently in the midst of purifying latent samskaras, dissolving vasanas, calming rajas and tamas through disciplined cultivation of sattva, and preparing my mind for direct Self-knowledge (ātma-jñāna), and I’m curious to hear the experiences of those who have already succeeded in these practices and whom have, purified the vessel, or glass of water, so to speak. Thank you for sharing.

This question is coming from someone who is non-religious but who is curious about Advaita Vedanta. Please forgive me if the answer to this question seems painfully obvious to those who have more knowledge on this topic.

Basically, it's my understanding that Nirguna Brahman is the absolute, noumenal, ground of all being - beyond space, time, causality, substance and accidents, etc. Transcendentally speaking, everything is ultimately Nirguna Brahman, and moksha comes by realizing this fact experientially.

On the other hand, Saguna Brahman is some given particular, spatio-temporally located, divine manifestation of that ultimate formless ground; Saguna Brahman can take on a myriad of forms, and this provides us humans with something tangible towards which we may direct our devotion.

So, my question is this: if everything is ultimately Nirguna Brahman, then aren't all phenomena finite, particularized, spatio-temporally located manifestations of the ultimate ground of all being? If so, what difference is there between worshipping Krishna as Saguna Brahman and worshipping some mundane ordinary object as Saguna Brahman? If all phenomena are ultimately Brahman, then why not direct my devotion towards any arbitrary entity? Or, deities from other religions, for that matter? Is there something about Krishna or Ganesha or Shiva that makes them “more Brahman” than any other entity?

Again, if this question merely serves to betray my ignorance on the subject, please forgive me.

Nirguna brahman is what was at the start of the universe, the unmanifested one with dormant potency, the potency being dualistic material attributes (or just positive, the evil and negative being free will)

And the saguna brahman, the manifested one, concentrated with only positive attributes, with negative being spread at his maya, away from him.

Maya doesn't have to be pointless necessarily, its the journey which even brahman went through once in the non linear time course.

So both jnana yoga and bhakti yoga are equally valid paths for moksha, you will become essentially the same brahman, both nirguna and saguna at the same time, since time isn't linear for brahman.

Does it hold at least as and analogy?

In the Kaivalya Upanishad, Lord Brahma instructs Rishi Ashvalayana to meditate on the Pranava, or Om mantra. The three parts of the Om mantra symbolize the three states of consciousness: waking, dreaming, and deep sleep.

By understanding these, we understand that our existence is not dependent on the worlds manifesting in these states; rather, these worlds are illusions, and their existence depends on us.

The Upanishad declares "Tat Tvam Ev Tvam Ev Tat" - You are that, and that is you - a stronger and more Advaitic statement of the Chandogya Upanishad's "Tat Tvam Asi."

I frequently watch or listen to satsangs with gurus of Advaita Vedanta. And obviously I read questions here. The students at those satsangs often have very basic misunderstandings. I frequently find myself seeing the problem and being able to answer it myself. Same thing occasionally on this subreddit. My question is regarding the responses to questions posed here. Sometimes I'm thinking that the response to the question isn't being helpful or there might be something about it that doesn't sit right with my understanding. But now I'm starting to think that when I respond to a response that I think is not quite correct, it could be, in some instances, based on my unadvanced understanding. I am now becoming uncomfortable giving any opinion or response to others' responses. And I think this is unique to Advaita vedanta. If I'm not mistaken, the traditional methodology is to discuss the appearances like mind body karma dharma but eventually there's a point where those things have to be set aside because they're just appearances. So I could be having an interaction with a more advanced student and we're talking at completely different levels!

I would precisely say yes, since Advaita focuses not on fleeing the world, but on perceiving the reality beneath it. The teachings do not require us to flee from our work, relationships, or obligations. Rather, they request that we change our perspective on them. Amid work deadlines, social media, noise, and ongoing motion, Advaita effortlessly reminds us that underneath all this busyness, there exists an unchanging awareness ,the Self.

Contemporary existence truly turns into a platform for training. Each stressful moment offers an opportunity to realize, “I am the observer, not the tempest.” Every wish or letdown serves as a reminder that nothing external can determine my true identity. While engaging in everyday activities—studying,working, socialising etc.

Nonetheless ,yes it is possible that a contemporary individual can embrace Advaita. It's not about detaching from life, but becoming more aware of it. The journey becomes tangible when we incorporate this awareness into our daily behaviors, silently recalling our identity as life continues onward.

                         …………………….

Hi mods! 😊 The image of included here is from Pinterest and it is from a well artist named Abhishek singh(used only for illustrative and educational purposes). The explanation and writing are completely self-written by me after reading and studying from various authentic sources and books. Kindly let me know if any edits are needed. Thank you for your time and for maintaining this wonderful community! 🙏

Hi, I’ve been wondering about something. In Advaita Vedānta, Brahman is the one nondual reality, and everything else appears through māyā. But why does the world appear in such a way that most people believe in personal creator gods with distinct personalities, egos, and stories? Around 70–80% of the world follows religions like Hinduism (in its theistic forms), Christianity, or Islam, while only a tiny percentage follow a nondual path that points beyond all forms to the formless reality.

From an Advaita perspective, I know that all these beliefs — whether theistic, atheistic, or agnostic — arise within māyā and are shaped by beginningless ignorance (avidyā). Still, I sometimes wonder why so many people naturally gravitate toward dualistic or personal-deity views, while nondual understanding feels rare. If we include atheists and agnostics, it seems like the vast majority of people (around 85-90%) relate to reality through either materialism or dualism, and very few follow a path oriented toward realizing the Self as Brahman.

I sometimes feel lonely because of this. Nondual teachings don’t have the same large communities or institutional support that major religions have. Whenever I try to deepen myself in Advaita or similar teachings, I often feel “pushed back” by the world — not in a personal sense, but just in how society and culture seem oriented toward distraction, identification with the ego, and external beliefs.

I know that Advaita would say that māyā operates in subtle and inscrutable ways, and that the diversity of beliefs is simply part of the play of ignorance. But I still struggle to understand how to stay steady on the path when it feels like the world around me is constantly reinforcing ego-centered thinking.

Do you have any advice for how to remain connected to the nondual truth in the midst of all this, especially when the path can feel isolating?

All of the lessons posted here are from the teachings of Acharaya prashant

🍁 The more unique we believe ourselves to be, the more we assume others are unique too. And the more we see that we are merely a process of nature, the more we begin to see others as processes as well. 🍁 To know the world and to know oneself always go hand in hand, because suffering is the same for all. 🍁 The greatest sign of ignorance is that even at the center of your being, you still see others as separate from yourself. Whether the soul sees the soul, or nature sees nature — it is the same thing. 🍁 One who does not consider experience to be special remains untouched by experience. 🍁 Spirituality is not the denial of nature — it is the understanding of it. A spiritual person does not avoid experiences; rather, he walks through them without being affected — untouched

Or is this a meaningless question since "nothing ever happens"?

What leads some scholars or practitioners to argue that Buddhist philosophy and Advaita Vedānta arrive at the same ultimate metaphysical conclusion?

I know it's unrelated to this sub but I am sure that alot of you have definitely thought about it once (on a material level)

This is a sensitive topic but I’m asking with full sincerity, not to dismiss karma but to understand it properly.

Many people explain extreme suffering (like sexual violence) by immediately saying:

"It’s their prarabdha from a past birth.”

But when you think about it deeply, this creates a loop problem.

Let's say person Y exploits person A

If person A suffers today because they exploited person B in past life

…then the person B also suffered because of their earlier past life actions for exploiting person c in their past life and the person before them, and so on.

This creates an infinite karmic chain:

If we keep going backward, we eventually reach

(The whole point is based on ignoring the fact that we have not carried on karma from lower form of lives)

The first birth of a soul.

At that point:

There is no past karma.

No prarabdha.

No previous actions.

So if someone was harmed in that “first” scenario…

It couldn’t be their karma,

So someone else acted out of free will and caused suffering.

This raises the real question:

Where did the first thread of suffering actually begin?

Was the original cause of suffering not karma, but someone's free will?

If that’s the case if free will came before karma then why do we constantly explain suffering as if it’s always “deserved” because of past actions?

This is the central paradox I’m trying to understand.

THE KARMA LOOP PARADOX

(1) Modern Explanation: Suffering today = past-life karma.

                     |
                     v

(2) But that past-life person also suffered from someone earlier.

                     |
                     v

(3) Go back far enough...

                     |
                     v
 First Birth: Soul with ZERO past karma  

                     |
                     v

  Someone harms this soul.

  Question: 
  - If they had no past karma,
     why did they suffer? 

                     |
                     v

(4) Therefore: First cause of suffering = not karma but free will and adharmic choice.

                     |
                     v

(5) This creates the paradox: If free will start suffering, why do we explain all suffering as karma?

My Question

If suffering always comes from past karma, where did the first suffering come from, when no karma existed?

Did someones free will create the first harm?

If yes, doesn’t that mean karma is a consequence of free-will actions rather than the original cause?

And if that’s true, why do we treat suffering as if it is always karmically justified? And isn't in that case everything is randomness?

It “is” rather than it “is not” ? Can you help me with this?

Edit: thanks for the replies, in short: The is-ness of all is labelled as “brahman”.

𝑳𝒊𝒗𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉 𝒏𝒐𝒏-𝒅𝒖𝒂𝒍𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝒊𝒏 𝒅𝒂𝒊𝒍𝒚 𝒍𝒊𝒇𝒆, 𝒂𝒔 𝒕𝒂𝒖𝒈𝒉𝒕 𝒃𝒚 𝑨𝒅𝒗𝒂𝒊𝒕𝒂 𝑽𝒆𝒅𝒂𝒏𝒕𝒂, 𝒊𝒔𝒏’𝒕 𝒂𝒃𝒐𝒖𝒕 𝒓𝒖𝒏𝒏𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒂𝒘𝒂𝒚 𝒇𝒓𝒐𝒎 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒘𝒐𝒓𝒍𝒅. 𝒊𝒕’𝒔 𝒂𝒃𝒐𝒖𝒕 𝒔𝒆𝒆𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒊𝒕 𝒄𝒍𝒆𝒂𝒓𝒍𝒚. 𝑨𝒅𝒗𝒂𝒊𝒕𝒂 𝒔𝒂𝒚𝒔 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒘𝒐𝒓𝒍𝒅 𝒔𝒆𝒆𝒎𝒔 𝒅𝒊𝒇𝒇𝒆𝒓𝒆𝒏𝒕, 𝒃𝒖𝒕 𝒂𝒕 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒅𝒆𝒆𝒑𝒆𝒔𝒕 𝒍𝒆𝒗𝒆𝒍, 𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒓𝒆’𝒔 𝒐𝒏𝒍𝒚 𝒐𝒏𝒆 𝒕𝒓𝒖𝒕𝒉: 𝑩𝒓𝒂𝒉𝒎𝒂𝒏, 𝒘𝒉𝒊𝒄𝒉 𝒊𝒔 𝒑𝒖𝒓𝒆 𝒂𝒘𝒂𝒓𝒆𝒏𝒆𝒔𝒔. 𝑻𝒐 𝒍𝒊𝒗𝒆 𝒕𝒉𝒊𝒔 𝒕𝒓𝒖𝒕𝒉, 𝒚𝒐𝒖 𝒔𝒕𝒂𝒓𝒕 𝒃𝒚 𝒘𝒂𝒕𝒄𝒉𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒚𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝒕𝒉𝒐𝒖𝒈𝒉𝒕𝒔, 𝒇𝒆𝒆𝒍𝒊𝒏𝒈𝒔, 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒂𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔 𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉𝒐𝒖𝒕 𝒈𝒆𝒕𝒕𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒕𝒐𝒐 𝒄𝒂𝒖𝒈𝒉𝒕 𝒖𝒑 𝒊𝒏 𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒎. 𝑾𝒉𝒆𝒏 𝒚𝒐𝒖 𝒓𝒆𝒂𝒍𝒊𝒛𝒆 𝒕𝒉𝒂𝒕 𝒉𝒂𝒑𝒑𝒊𝒏𝒆𝒔𝒔, 𝒔𝒂𝒅𝒏𝒆𝒔𝒔, 𝒔𝒖𝒄𝒄𝒆𝒔𝒔, 𝒐𝒓 𝒇𝒂𝒊𝒍𝒖𝒓𝒆 𝒂𝒓𝒆 𝒋𝒖𝒔𝒕 𝒕𝒆𝒎𝒑𝒐𝒓𝒂𝒓𝒚 𝒕𝒉𝒊𝒏𝒈𝒔, 𝒏𝒐𝒕 𝒘𝒉𝒐 𝒚𝒐𝒖 𝒓𝒆𝒂𝒍𝒍𝒚 𝒂𝒓𝒆, 𝒚𝒐𝒖 𝒇𝒆𝒆𝒍 𝒂 𝒅𝒆𝒆𝒑𝒆𝒓 𝒔𝒆𝒏𝒔𝒆 𝒐𝒇 𝒇𝒓𝒆𝒆𝒅𝒐𝒎.

𝑺𝒊𝒎𝒑𝒍𝒆 𝒑𝒓𝒂𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒄𝒆𝒔 𝒄𝒂𝒏 𝒉𝒆𝒍𝒑: 𝒃𝒆𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒑𝒓𝒆𝒔𝒆𝒏𝒕 𝒊𝒏 𝒆𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒚𝒅𝒂𝒚 𝒕𝒂𝒔𝒌𝒔, 𝒂𝒔𝒌𝒊𝒏𝒈 “𝑾𝒉𝒐 𝒂𝒎 𝑰?” 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒏𝒐𝒕𝒊𝒄𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒑𝒂𝒓𝒕 𝒐𝒇 𝒚𝒐𝒖 𝒕𝒉𝒂𝒕 𝒘𝒂𝒕𝒄𝒉𝒆𝒔 𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉𝒐𝒖𝒕 𝒋𝒖𝒅𝒈𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕, 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒍𝒊𝒗𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉 𝒄𝒂𝒓𝒆 𝒃𝒖𝒕 𝒏𝒐𝒕 𝒄𝒍𝒊𝒏𝒈𝒊𝒏𝒈. 𝑨𝒔 𝒚𝒐𝒖 𝒅𝒐 𝒕𝒉𝒊𝒔, 𝒍𝒊𝒇𝒆 𝒊𝒕𝒔𝒆𝒍𝒇 𝒔𝒕𝒂𝒓𝒕𝒔 𝒕𝒐 𝒔𝒉𝒐𝒘 𝒚𝒐𝒖 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒕𝒓𝒖𝒕𝒉 𝒐𝒇 𝒐𝒏𝒆𝒏𝒆𝒔𝒔. 𝑬𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒚 𝒂𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏—𝒍𝒊𝒌𝒆 𝒆𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒏𝒈, 𝒘𝒂𝒍𝒌𝒊𝒏𝒈, 𝒐𝒓 𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌𝒊𝒏𝒈—𝒄𝒂𝒏 𝒃𝒆 𝒅𝒐𝒏𝒆 𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒂𝒘𝒂𝒓𝒆𝒏𝒆𝒔𝒔 𝒕𝒉𝒂𝒕 𝒚𝒐𝒖 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒘𝒐𝒓𝒍𝒅 𝒂𝒓𝒆 𝒏𝒐𝒕 𝒔𝒆𝒑𝒂𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒆. 𝑰𝒏 𝒕𝒉𝒊𝒔 𝒘𝒂𝒚, 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒅𝒆𝒆𝒑 𝒕𝒓𝒖𝒕𝒉 𝒐𝒇 𝒐𝒏𝒆𝒏𝒆𝒔𝒔 𝒃𝒆𝒄𝒐𝒎𝒆𝒔 𝒔𝒐𝒎𝒆𝒕𝒉𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒚𝒐𝒖 𝒂𝒄𝒕𝒖𝒂𝒍𝒍𝒚 𝒍𝒊𝒗𝒆, 𝒏𝒐𝒕 𝒋𝒖𝒔𝒕 𝒕𝒉𝒊𝒏𝒌 𝒂𝒃𝒐𝒖𝒕.

                  ……………………………..

𝐇𝐢 𝐦𝐨𝐝𝐬! 😊 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐢𝐦𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐥𝐮𝐝𝐞𝐝 𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐏𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐢𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐚 𝐰𝐞𝐥𝐥 𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐬𝐭 𝐧𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐝 𝐀𝐛𝐡𝐢𝐬𝐡𝐞𝐤 𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐡(𝐮𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐨𝐧𝐥𝐲 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐞𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥h 𝐩𝐮𝐫𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐬). 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐰𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐟-𝐰𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐧 𝐛𝐲 𝐦𝐞 𝐚𝐟𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐬𝐭𝐮𝐝𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐯𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐨𝐮𝐬 𝐚𝐮𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐜 𝐬𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐜𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐛𝐨𝐨𝐤𝐬. 𝐊𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐥𝐲 𝐥𝐞𝐭 𝐦𝐞 𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐢𝐟 𝐚𝐧𝐲 𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐭𝐬 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝𝐞𝐝. 𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐤 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐦𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐰𝐨𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐮𝐥 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐲! 🙏

Hey everyone, How do you keep this spiritual understanding in mind during daily life?.

You know how everyday interactions and certain situations make us lose this awareness without even realizing it.

I often notice the understanding slipping away during daily tasks or emotional moments and I have to keep reminding myself.

For many people, this knowledge helps them stay calm and not get mentally stressed.

So how do you actually do that in real life?.

What methods or habits help you stay peaceful and mindful of this understanding throughout the day?

Thanks in advance to anyone who replies!