91: Bhagavad Gita Class by Swami Tadatmananda - Ch.13 Verses 12-16

[@NFZ138]

वसुदेवसुतं देवं कंसचाणूरमर्दनम् । देवकीपरमानन्दं कृष्णं वन्दे जगद्गुरुम् ॥ ५॥ Vasudeva sutam devam kamsa Chanoora mardhanam Devaki paramaanandam Krishnam vande Jagad Gurum. O son of Vasudeva, O Lord who destroyed Kamsa and Chanuura O Joy of mother Devaki, Salutations O Krishna, the teacher of the world.

[@Girygen]

namo gurubyah🙏

[@prakashvakil3322]

Aatmiya DIVINITY AUM. TAT SAT. HARE KRSNA............... Accurately, Precisely, Distinctly Knowing, Learning, Understanding, Realising: - 1) Awakening & Dreaming Self 2) Saguna Brahma & Nirguna Brahma 3) Imminent & Transcendental 4) Biblical Learning [faith based] & Vedantic [understanding based] Learning. Very respectfully Loving 💕 ING You One and All DIVINE ❤️❤️❤️🙏❤️ NOW, HERE & Beyond in this Light, Moment & Vibrations Experiencing HAPPINESS & deep Inner PEACE, Contentment & Freedom from desire,fear, anger keeping 🤬🤬🤬 AUM. TAT SAT.

[@rajeshjoshi4080]

Thank you Swami ji, for the elaborate discourse on such an intricate topic of Brahman as discussed i. adhyay 13 ...it really helped. My salutations to you. Jai Shri Krishna.

[@barryobrien1890]

Thankyou Swamiji Happy Diwali Really appreciate the distinction you bring up with blind faith. In the conventional religion sense, faith is required in a knowable form of God, while Adviata limits faith to the unknowable, and the knowable is to be experienced through understanding.

[@sriharimulukunte7881]

Stanza 13.15 is the Figure of speech, antithesis, a juxtaposition of opposites. Beautiful discourse , Dear Swamiji.

[@rajukunjukrishnan472]

Pranam Guruji 🙏

[@kirtijoshi7735]

Thank you Swamiji. Grateful to you as always. 🙏 Pranam.

[@narendrabhambure8958]

Brilliant analysis and teaching skill

[@TheKennyGoes]

WOW and Thank You Swamiji ! Hari Om and see you soon

[@jasminka-k9t]

Namaskar! Blessings to all! Thank you Swamiji for an important explanation of Nirguna and Saguna Brahman. The truth always looks to human mind as a Paradox, so it is not surprise that Lord Krishna weaves these 2 aspects of Reality as he does. Amazing poetry also! Om Shanti! 🙏🏿

[@onetwozerojourney]

Thanks Swamiji 🙏.

[@alukuhito]

Om. Thank you, Swami-ji.

[@koochithatha7486]

Salutations, Guruji. Thanks for a wonderful session. Inspiring to listen when subject matter is ‘Vedantic in nature’. Om Shanti 🙏🏼

[@gridcoregilry666]

thank you so much for the constant classes!

[@ravish05]

thank you swamiji for the wonderful session as always. I feel the distinction of nirguna Brahman and saguna Brahman and a good understanding of the nuances that differentiate them and how they are applicable to us as individual is the core of understanding Hinduism. I have for some reason associate saguna Brahman with Lord Vishnu and nirguna Brahman with Shiva and that has generally been helpful in getting some clarity between the two aspectsbif Brahman.

[@lunar2277]

Thank you 🙏

[@4maihar]

Very learned Swami ji.

[@kathyryan7611]

💖💖💖

[@pravingandhi4468]

Verse 13.13 - Are we to understand our existence is a dream of Ishwara?

[@kanishkajoshi563]

🙏

[@HAR_HAR_MAHADEV3335]

❤🎉

[@wetti2004]

Dear Swamiji, thanks very much for this profound and elevating teaching, as always. Please allow me to contradict to some of your statements about Christianity. The Christian understanding of God is not (only) remote, as you said, but the concept of trinity is differentiated, and especially the Holy Spirit is the aspect of God, which is omnipresent and even living inside us. I would definitly compare it with the (nirguna) Brahman in hinduism. What is your background about Christianity? Did you study Christian theology profiundly, or did you only made sone bad experiences and therefore transporting these undifferentiated clichés?

[@rsr9200]

I recognize that the terms Nirguna Brahman and Saguna Brahman were perhaps coined by enlightened and extraordinary teachers of Advaita who followed Shankara for reasons which I may never understand from my standpoint as an ordinary sadhaka. That said, I cannot help but wonder why they did not just rely on satyam jnanam anantam Brahma in lieu of Nirguna Brahman to imply the transcendent nature of Brahman and sarvam khalvidam Brahma in lieu of Saguna Brahman to denote the immanent nature of Brahman. Seems to me that the Upanishads already provide sufficient richness of terminology needed for teaching Advaita in that regard. Viewed from this perspective, it seems to me that Upanishadic Ishvara is satyam jnana anantam Brahma that *appears* to be sarvam khalvidam Brahma wherein the latter includes embodied jivas like us. What used to trip me up previously about the terms Nirguna Brahman and Saguna Brahman was my mistaken view that Nirguna and Saguna were both adjectives qualifying Brahman to distinguish two distinct and separate kinds of Brahman. It was while listening to one of the discourses on this KZbin channel that it dawned on me that Nirguna is not an adjective that qualifies Brahman but rather is a term that conveys the svarupa or essential nature of Brahman just as the terms satyam, jnanan, and anantam do. In contrast, the term Saguna is an adjective that qualifies or seemingly limits Brahman to that which can be objectified through our minds. Therefore, Saguna Brahman is technically an appearance of Nirguna Brahman and, as such, the svarupa or essential nature of Saguna Brahman is Nirguna as well. So, as I see it, the term Nirguna Saguna Brahman is a technically correct way of saying Saguna Brahman although, arguably, it is superfluous and confusing. Further, when Advaita teachers say that Nirguna and Saguna are two *aspects* of Brahman, I now understand it to mean that they are using the English term *aspect* in the sense of the Merriam-Webster definition as “appearance to the eye or mind” and not in the sense of the online dictionary definition as "a particular part or feature of something”. The latter meaning implies that Brahman possesses features, which cannot be the case. By no means is this a critique of any particular Advaita teaching methodology because I am not qualified in any way for that task. However, I somehow feel eminently qualified to talk about mistakes I make as a student of Advaita because I have perhaps an unrivaled ability for making mistakes.

[@barryobrien1890]

Nicely put. I would be careful about labeling anything a mistake, and rather label it as an understanding at that level of development. As the eminent Scientist and philosopher Donald Hoffman likes to put it when he discusses absolute reality " this is what I understand, but i am most likely wrong". The teachings reinforce this by letting us know that Bramhan is unknowable, and as you put it, we can only aspire to relate to satguna Bramhan. Happy Diwali

[@rsr9200]

@@barryobrien1890 Diwali greetings to you as well! I share your admiration for Don Hoffman and I am persuaded that he is one those rare “meditative scientists” with mind-blowing insights which arguably can only be obtained through the practice of meditation. Also, I agree with your observation that the Upanishads teach that Brahman is unknowable through our mind. However, I would add that they also teach that Brahman is not to be known as an other but to be realized as what we are, here and now.

[@barryobrien1890]

@@rsr9200 Agreed. We are beginners on the eternal path. Have a wonderful holiday season

[@parthaproteemroy9742]

@@barryobrien1890 Thanks for clearing a lot of doubts ...hope to be connected to you all

[@kanishkajoshi563]

Existence has always been: it has never been created and it can never be destroyed. “Creation” means out of nothing - and out of nothing, nothing can come. The world, the creation, is in constant change, but nothing can be created or destroyed. You can be a soul, but you may also miss. If your whole consciousness becomes an actuality, if the potential becomes an actual center of perfect awareness, then the attachment to the body will be lost. You will appear to be a body to others, but for you there will be no body. This duality must be thrown away. Body means unconscious energy and soul means conscious energy. The energy is the same. Look at it in this way: matter means only one thing, potential soul, and soul means only matter that has come to its flowering. Forget completely the concept of creation and forget any concept of duality. Only then can you go deep into existence as it is. You are free to be unfree, you are free to be a slave. Your freedom is such that you can choose unfreedom also, because if you cannot choose to be unfree then your freedom is not total. That is the dilemma. Ordinary logic will ask, “If man is free then why is he not free? If man is divine then why does he not feel divine? If man is bliss then why is man not in bliss?” Man is unfree because he is free - he has chosen. Man can choose freedom and become free or man can go against himself, against his nature. That is what freedom implies. When you can go against your nature, when you can expand your consciousness or not expand your consciousness, you become free, responsible - or more damaging to yourself. Animals are not free - not free in the sense that they are more unconscious. They live by instinct, they cannot choose. They have a fixed nature; they have to follow it. Man has no fixed nature - there is no such thing as man’s nature. Man has freedom: he can fall, he can rise: he can go lower than the animals or higher than the angels. He has no fixed nature.

[@rajukunjukrishnan472]

Pranam Guruji 🙏

[@WilliamCanino]

Thank You