Bhakti Yoga: Is Bhagavan Real or Unreal? | Prof. Edwin Bryant

[@ananttripathi4264]

Proff Bryant just changed how I looked at bhakti. This was a gift

[@arthurolimpio5739]

I love Bryant and the way he speaks, unapologetic, being himself as well as expressing sympathy and sheer knowledge coming from all directions, academic and experiently. He is an inspiration for me, as I also speak like him, fidgeting and going all sorts of places. But where he goes he gives you gold regardless. Much respect!

[@ankitruparel1895]

He is brilliant! Does he have his own channel

[@Sankhyame]

​@@ankitruparel1895 please send me link of his channel.

[@saraswati999]

My teacher recently mentioned that actually Bhakti Yoga in true sense is a very difficult practice for it really is a blessing from the Divine for one to have this authentic feeling of love so yes its a grace most of us develop a sense of practice through intellect

[@robinchristian5907]

"The best path to union with God is to follow the way of divine love as taught by Narada." - Sri Ramakrishna (opening page of 'Narada's Way of Divine Love' by Swami Prabhavananda). Thank you Prof. Bryant....brilliant and inspiring!

[@forestmonk5370]

When he talks about Bhakti, he seems so much excited. As far as I can remember, it is mentioned as a prime symptom of a Bhakti Yogi in the scripture.

[@zotharr]

Im soo happy, seeing two great teachers in the same video :) Thank you

[@chandraramesh3845]

Awestruck and Jawdropping! Love Prof. Bryant's clarity, expression, and articulation! Salute sir

[@rattangujadhur8215]

A true bhakta ! Brilliant talk by Professor Bryant. So much anugraha flowed to the audience and listeners. He totally debunked the intellectual vagaries of vedanta sutras and debunked scientific methodologies. In brief we cannot in true reality grasp the ultimate. Let’s be honest and truthful about it !

[@indianmilitary]

Microcosm = Macrocosm. So, the whole perpetual duality cycles of existence itself is because of nondual state of Shiva and Shakthi. But human ego always wanted to experience something more. So, it falls for so called "omniscient and omnipotent" experience which automatically creates non existent difference between athman and brahman. This is Bhakti yoga (blind devotion) which was inserted by colonialists to replace the word Shraddha (trust but verify with intense efforts to know the unknown without ego). Motive of colonialists was to make Hindu tradition mimic blind faith Abrahamic religions and also create bhakti cult organizations so that people can controlled.

[@utubetruthteller]

Intellect is the son, instinct is the father

[@ayw5118]

The best talk on Bhakti yoga ever watched. Thank you Prof, always in your debt.

[@amiraarora5002]

Edwin Bryant ji is just ❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️🙏

[@VedantaKesari]

So very refreshing! Thank you.

[@amiraarora5002]

Koti Koti Pranam to a devotee of Bhagwan Krishna 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️

[@OfficialGOD]

simple experiential path❤

[@martinwagner7361]

That's one of its great advantages 🥰👌

[@amiraarora5002]

Hare Krishna Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare Hare Hare Ram Hare Ram Ram Ram Hare Hare 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

[@RobElings]

with reference to the gopis and Prof Bryant's use of the term 'raganuga' - the more correct term would be 'ragatmika'

[@Vision_Of_Realities]

What we see outside that is just like illusions…but when you go inside of your oneself you will energies by your ownself to see the real world of infinite truth….go deep & deep… you will see… you infront of God …and …and…then see you r God by yourself 🌺🌺🌺 Jai Sri Ramakrishna 🌺🙏🐚

[@beauforda.stenberg1280]

I appreciate Bryant's point, that in his experience, bhakti was first given by a bhakta, within a sangha. That he also points to scripture, that states that bhakti is ahetu or acausal. Tradition holds that bhakti does not arise, but that it is given. Grace. Mercy. My personal lived experience as pramana, problematises all such assertions, at first blush. My earliest memory, was regarding remembering, and it was contextualised within naturally arising spontaneous spirituality or a nascent religious sentiment. I was born within a non-religious family and grew up within a non-religious household. Yet, that given, from my earliest memory, I was religious, and profoundly interested and attracted to religion. Therefore, my story shares in that of Pralad. Both my story, and that of Pralad, problematises, Bryant's assertion. Well, at least on the face of it. The first clearly Dharmic accoutrement or artefact I was aware of, was the Ankush, in a telling of Kipling's 'Jungle Book', and it has defined my life: action, knowledge and devotion.

[@sayan_tan]

That lady asking about fanaticism is probably woke. Only fanaticism I notice is some Isckon monks attacking Sadhguru or Mayabad on youtube and in the comments the Isckonists saying that monk is not directly linked to isckon. Unlike abrahamics, Indian philosophical debates never went to violence. We rejected some of Buddha's views but consider him as Avatara. Advaitins heavily respects Ramanuja and Madhava and Sri Chaitanya. I just saw recently that Isckon monk Amogh leela prabhu went to one of the modern Shankaracharya and calling for unity among different sects of Sanatana Dharma.I think this Abrahamic sensitivity against religious wars must be stopped against eastern traditions. Hindus even worship and respects Shikh Gurus, Jain saints.

[@amiraarora5002]

Jai Sri Krishna ❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️

[@amiraarora5002]

Radhe Radhe Radhe Radhe❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️

[@lmletalheadcrab]

I love this man. He's a joy to watch and great at teaching and explaining.

[@vrishabhlakhani]

Love this talk

[@sudfromindia5763]

Where the Gita ends( Sarva Dharman Paritajya- Leave all Dharma and surrender to me only) there Shrimad Bhagavatam starts(Dharmaḥ projjhita-kaitavo ’tra paramo nirmatsarāṇāṁ satāṁ) ie:- Completely rejecting all religious activities(Dharma) which are materially motivated, this Bhāgavata Purāṇa propounds the highest truth

[@amiraarora5002]

Ladoo Gopala❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰💕💕💕💕

[@amiraarora5002]

Hare Krishna 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

[@sudfromindia5763]

Yatha Brij Gopikanaam- Narada Bhakti Sutra. Even the greatest of Bhakti Acharya(Devotion Master)- Narada acknowledges that Gopis are the pinnacle of Bhakti(Devotion)..

[@arya-zh5qj]

Bryant is soooooo Bhola (innocent love pure etc etc❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️

[@travisortwein6974]

he is one of those few teachers i would of loved to had in school.

[@shivamumbai1]

In bhakti yoga, truth ( God) seeker transforms formless truth, into forms and taste it in form state, enjoy same bliss as that of formless practioners.

[@amiraarora5002]

Kripa 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

[@beingfrank40]

That-was-AWESOME!🙏

[@martinwagner7361]

Is this the old talk few weeks ago or a new one ? 🥰

[@jatinpatel1224]

@Audrey Truschke, may she get essence of Yoga, Bhakti to have minimalistic expectation of "Dharma".

[@Trivenidevidasi]

Hare Krishna! This is very helpful. Thank you!

[@I-i-Like-You]

The book he mentioned at 1:01, "Intelligence From Chaos"..., I did a search but can't find that book. There are about 25 books with similar titles, but none with that specific title nor anything incorporating a Vedanta perspective. Can someone give me more information please? Perhaps the author's name or the ISBN? Namaste 🙏

[@deadlyninja8391]

Intelligence or Chaos, the Atheist Delusion by Henk J. Keilman

[@saraswati999]

The Intelligence of Chaos Paperback - January 4, 2021 by Dr Damien Gerard found this too can someone clarify which book that is then ?

[@mystikmusings5451]

Came to the comments looking for this info. Based on the book blurbs Im inclined to think he’s referring to the Keilman text

[@CrazyLinguiniLegs]

*1:01:00

[@forestmonk5370]

the Bhakti Yoga is the supreme as it connects us with the Supreme. It's a selfless and unbiased way of seeing things. Prof. Edwin Bryant is a learned scholar. He makes complex things real easy to understand.

[@MoorishMonitor]

Is this a re-upload? Looks like it. Great talk/discussion and exploration regardless.

[@martinwagner7361]

Yes, unfortunately. Had hoped it was a new one....Prof. Byrant is a rather cute Dude that's pretty knowledgeable 🥰👌🙏

[@zotharr]

@@martinwagner7361 It's not a re-upload. He mentiones the Friday svadhyaya about the Vedanta Sutra, which I'm attending. This is around one and a half weeks old

[@zotharr]

@@martinwagner7361 maybe it is a re-upload, if by old you mean one week old

[@Kasidev107]

Bhagwan is as real as you Prabhuji 🤩 aham brahmasmi.

[@dominiknowaczyk9633]

What books would you guys reccomend that actually teach bhakti?

[@SilentThespian]

Love his lectures

[@sudfromindia5763]

Ajaymano Bahudha Bhijayate- That one(God) revealed it into many. Purusha Sukta of Yajurveda(Both Black and White)

[@avani1110]

Mithya/asat. That is the difference. The unreality of the world is a misrepresentation of Advaita

[@indianmilitary]

Advaitha does not say that. Only some ADVAITHA followers misinterpret Maya as the illusion through which Brahman falsely appears as the universe. Maya is just another name for "manifesting" intelligent energy or Shakthi. It is absolutely real. So, is our material realm. In the same way, they also distort Mithya by saying it is false. Mithya means temporary existence but it does not mean false.

[@beauforda.stenberg1280]

No Sanskrit term is easily, definitively, or definitely reducible to one English term. Saying Maya is illusion, is falsehood and platitude. So too, stating that Sri Shankara stated that the world is "false" is attribution and imposition, and a decontextualisation, of what should be understood within context, and specifically within the discourse of the original texts, in the original languages, in the original scripts, and therefore, in their historical context, insofar as this is even possible.

[@mithun9643]

Is DMT ayusha mushroom these gives same divay chakchhu.

[@gregorystevens6540]

He is the best!😊

[@athulasamarasekera661]

It's facinating !tks for t enlightenment !👏👑

[@sudfromindia5763]

53:32- yato vacho nivartante . aprapya manasa saha anandam brahmano vidvan.h . na bibheti kadachaneti He who knows the Bliss of Brahman, whence all words together with the mind turn away, unable to reach it-he never fears - Taittiriya Upanishad( Black Yajurveda)

[@beauforda.stenberg1280]

I have just viewed a few lengthy videos of Bryant in sequence. I found myself pausing this video and searching the Internet and the beginnings of a few of his books for a declaration of his ishta-devatam, to no avail. I noted that he uses the word 'Bhagavan' with a palpable reverence and devotion, which is not evident in his employ of Sri Krishna. Bryant is clearly a Vaishnava and more specifically a Krishnite, but his devotion is not to the specific divine name or personality of Sri Krishna. I was somewhat annoyed at not being able to definitively ascertain his ishta-devatam. On returning to playing the video after my researching and endeavours, I was delighted at his unequivocal declaration in passing, that his ishta-devatam is "lala Gopal". His innocence and purity in aspect and devotion as he pronounced "lala Gopal" conveyed that he is not in the rasa of a parent, but is too in a "lala" or baby-friend aspect or eternal relationship with Lala Gopal. From a scholar-practitioner, this delights me greatly and endears me to his scholarship. In the Brajbhasha script, which is closely related to Devanagari, the term “lala” would be written as लाला. This term has various meanings and connotations within different contexts: In the context of Vaishnavism, particularly within the Krishna Bhakti traditions, “लाला” (lala) refers to an affectionate term for a young boy, often used to address Lord Krishna in his child form. In Ayurveda, “लाला” (lala) can mean saliva, which is considered an important aspect of the body’s functioning and balance. In general Hindi usage, “लाला” (lala) can be a title or form of address, equivalent to Mr, used in India. It is also a common surname. These definitions show the versatility of the term “lala” and how it is woven into various aspects of Indian culture, from spiritual and religious to everyday language. The traditional, attested dictionary definitions reflect the term’s rich semantic range across different fields of Indian knowledge and society.

[@Mischwesen_official]

Once, I died in a dream, but instead of going into the light, I decided not to seek my happiness externally anymore. Everything turned black. Sat Chit Ananda... but that eventually became boring, and I had the desire to experience the best possible incarnation. Immediately, I found myself by a gentle stream in a beautiful forest with a flute in my hand. I became Krishna :)! A wonderful and inspiring experience, even without being a true devotee. In any case, I have seen Krishna as an extension of myself since then, and myself as his."

[@HopsAndHarps]

With Awareness on the self (little ātman) There is a peace... but boring compared to the bliss possible in brahmā jyotih, including saguņa samādhi. Follow the light... hold love... Detach from all else. Premahrdayamārgam

[@HopsAndHarps]

An amazing "training dream" !!

[@noam65]

Bhagavan is very real, in every sense of that word.

[@2011shruti]

Bhakti comes after jnana. Bhaktas allow nonndualists to think thay are 'higher' because they know they are too blessed. Really the hierarchy is the other way round 🙏

[@beauforda.stenberg1280]

Is Bhagavan real or unreal? I feel that in truth, both 'real' or 'unreal' as ontological categories or perspectives upon a divinity with personality, is an unfounded value-judgement, speculative, based upon no evidence, and an attribution and projection, upon an ineffable and unknowable. The discussion should be further problematised by perceiving of the class of 'entities' or 'dharmas', through a process-oriented perspective. This is easily conveyed through the Sanatani 'Atman' and the Buddhadharma 'Anatman', where one is viewing from a nominal perspective of nouns or entities, or from a verb or process-oriented perspective. In truth, both Atman and Anatman are constructs. Through sadhana, explore the Atman and Anatman, they mutually iterate and inform and interpenetrate. I like the teaching tool and teaching story of "The Velveteen Rabbit". Where the 'rabbit' in the children's story is a metaphor for ishta-devatam. Or, where 'God' is the imaginary friend of childhood, writ large. Here’s the rub. Deity is no more or less real, than we are. We are just the imagination of ourselves. Further to Poe's "All that we see or seem, is but a dream within a dream": It is the dream that dreams, the dreamer is dreaming, and all that we see or seem. Mahavishnu, recumbent upon Adishesha, dreaming worlds within worlds, infinite forms and lilas. Lala Hari Aum Tat Sat.

[@sreejithMU]

12:40 Why God is not aware of the world.

[@thomasmurphy9429]

Excellent talk! But the digression into intelligent design by way of poor statistical mechanics was unscientific. No discussion of the improbability of complex life makes sense when we only have one example of complex life in a single universe (this makes the “probability” 100% in a single universe, which says nothing about intelligent design), and nothing about the chemistry from which life emerges raises an issue with purely mechanistic Darwinian evolution. No Ishvara required!

[@brianharris6437]

I don't accept his assertions that moksha cannot come through the Vedanta or that true love has to be exclusivistic. Knowing one's own nature, one sees that the Real has never been bound and the bound has never been real; the seeming reality of the bonds arises by imputation whose substance is only Brahman. And true love is not jealous or sectarian; that always signifies attachment, albeit the relatively good attachment to an ishta-devata and sadhana. But true love is non-exclusive; it is undiminished by the multiplicity of lovers or infinite forms of the Beloved. The love that is for this rather than that is inherently dualistic, with aversion as the other pole of attraction; and there is the root of hatred and its afflictions, demerits, etc. True love is beyond this and that, or I and thou; only such a love that is not the opposite of anything conquers death and attains to immortality.

[@deadlyninja8391]

moksha comes through vedanta only, there are Vaishnav Vedanta and Shankara Vedanta. Both accept moksha. True love is exclusivistic in the sense that you love only Bhagavan no one else. Every other love flows through Bhagavan. You love world because its a creation of Bhagavan in this sense. When did he say true love is jealous or sectarian? He says the Puranas promote each of the ishta devata as the causal form in that one can call it sectarian but as he himself said this just shows people just love their ishta. Love involves duality of Bhagavan and Jiva. If you are one with no inherent duality how can there be love then love is also illusion like Advaita says. There are 2 paths of Jnana and Bhakti.

[@rattangujadhur8215]

I don’t recall him saying love is exclusivist. He said it is anugraha whether coming from inner outer but only needs a cleaning of the mirror to receive and realize one is one with Brahman

[@indianmilitary]

@@deadlyninja8391 Moksha is also just a duality cycle of microcosm/macrocosm. it also means, everything starts again due to perpetual manifestation/concealment duality cycle of the universe. One needs correct understanding of Vedic metaphysics Sankhya which combines Advaitha and Dvaitha. Advaitha and Dvaitha are INCOMPLETE without each other. It is just like saying Shiva and Shakhti are INCOMPLETE without each other. So, they always exist together for the perpetual duality cycles of nature to happen.

[@indianmilitary]

@@rattangujadhur8215 yes but it still does not change the fact that the experiencer of all 7 states of consciousness (including the wake state) is the same immortal, immutable, self luminous, immanent (athma), transcendent and omnipresent Brahman even though not the doer. A CHAPTER 1 and verse 2 of ATHARVA VEDA “Ayam Atma Brahma" - "This Self or athma (conscious and immanent ) is Brahman (conscious, omnipresent and transcendent )". In Islam or Christianity or Judaism, soul is neither omnipresent nor conscious and it is definitely not equated with “Allah” or “God” B. CHAPTER 6 verse 8.7 of SAMA VEDA "Tat Tvam Asi" - means - you (immanent and conscious athma) are (already) that (Brahman). Identification with thoughts and body is just an illusion created by lack of knowledge, wrong assumption that the body is the experiencer of 5 senses (instead of the nondual athma which is NOT the doer) and ego (false sense of I). “Not the doer” means the omnipresent conscious self or the athma can neither act nor react even though the experiencer of everything including 5 senses of humans and non humans (including both animate and inanimate). Only its intelligent energy is the doer.

[@deadlyninja8391]

@@indianmilitary moksha is the end, there is no cycle after that. I am talking about advaita vedanta and the rest of vedanta they are full system of philosophy among themselves

[@lindseymccaskey8402]

awesome talk. as a former hare krishna devotee...

[@lindseymccaskey8402]

@@j92so practicing Buddhism

[@Dekanalini]

❤❤❤

[@Alexandr-wv6lk]

Stop fucking mic😂

[@michaelfinkelstein8380]

Be nondual, advaita. Be one with God

[@sudfromindia5763]

Prajapatyam Pavitram; Satodyam'Um Hiranmayam; Tena Brahma Vidovayam; Putam Brahma Punimahe - Punyaha Mantram(Taittiriya Samhita, Black Yajurveda)

[@brianharris6437]

Bryant says that the Western/Christian tradition never considered that God has the quality of vairagya but this is false. Look up divine aseity and impassibility, which convey the same point.

[@jaychetra3250]

Although I was never moved by the Bhakti tradition unlike Advaita, Madhyamaka, Yogacharya and Navya nyaya, I usually enjoyed Bryant’s talk on Bhakti. However, this talk as very disappointing and lack rigour. I simply couldn’t be sway. He sounded dogmatic and creates lots of straw man nonsense against the other systems of philosophy. He needed to be intellectually honest regarding the evil intents of the Christian missionaries. Poor talk, I gave it a 48/100 = C+.

[@beauforda.stenberg1280]

I feel you have misconstrued what was stated, and wantonly so. Bryant clearly placed the Christian missionaries, within their historical context, and within their worldview, and evaluated them accordingly, and rather sympathetically. They truly thought they were saving the damned, who were in the sway of Satan. That the Missionaries were doing violence, is a Modernist perspective, inarguable, and I feel valid. All that said, I agree. From a contemporary perspective, the violence that Christian missionaries wraught upon indigenous cultures, religions and worldviews, was violence, and were evil. It is complex. Do we evaluate them within their worldview, or within a contemporary pluralists' revisionism?

[@4kassis]

mythological does NOT mean "not true" google it if you must

[@beauforda.stenberg1280]

'Mythological' is an English construct from the Graeco-Roman/Hellenic/Classical tradition. As a concept and construct, it is alien and foreign to Dharma and Dharmic discourse. It is out of place and irrelevant.

[@chuckkespert353]

A natural born exegesist

[@SG-gq2rf]

Firstly, he tries to denigrate reasoning as leading to nothing but confusion but then says there is evidence and proof for the existence of God and we all know that these so called proofs are debated and get very technical. Secondly, he seems to hold a fideistic position that we can only know God if he tells us about himself, but this just begs the question. He says that we must accept God into our heart sincerely and that he will appear somehow; but what if he doesn't? as if I and others weren't sincere when seeking God but heard nothing but silence. Then he says God has many forms to appeal to people of different dispositions; but apparently it is a false disposition to be attracted to the path of knowledge and have awe for that; this is nothing but sectarianism; see how much more open and accommodating Swami is. It is because Advaita is not petty and limited to egoic and worldly personality traits that people have. Another misunderstanding is the idea people have of Bhakti being absent in Advaita or secondary. Nothing could be more false. Advaitins love and are drawn to the absolute with every fibre of their being to the point that their whole identity must die and be sacrificed to attain the object of their love, which in the final analysis they find to be their own essence. Further, since the world and all beings in it are maya, and maya is an imperfect reflection of Brahman, then anything of value in the world and in beings, including any relations of Love are already perfected in Brahman. At the level of Brahman every thing is together as if the whole world loved itself so much it became a single thing. A final error here is what he says about Moksha being like a prison that you can't escape from, where you just feel bliss and such. But Moksha isn't some place you go to or escape from; and it isn't me feeling bliss while the world around me is going on and such. It is the collapse or folding of space, time and causation itself. There are no waves from the perspective of water, and water encompasses everything. A wave can have affinity and love for another big wave (like in Bhakti), but water considered in itself collapses the distinction, the waves love to the point of identity. It isn't like the relation between big wave and little wave (God and soul) is lost, but completed.

[@souravl8565]

The technical point that Bhakti completely disagrees with Advaita vedanta is that Bhagavan is a manifestation of Brahman covered with ignorance - that is referred to by the Bhakti schools as "mayavada" - Bhakti to a product of maya is NOT Bhakti. Then Bhakti done for a purpose other than Bhakti - for Moksha - in Advaita, that Bhakti itself will dissolve. Yes it is debatable what is the highest purushartha, but at least in some theistic schools of Vedanta who subscribe to moksha being the highest purushartha, moksha is at least a "place" where Bhakti to "Bhagavan = Brahman" will continue.

[@souravl8565]

Yes Bhakti is proudly "sectarian" - if that seems to be so - kaibalyam narakaayate

[@sudfromindia5763]

Definition of God:- Satyam Jnana Anantam Brahman ie:- Brahman is Whole Truth, Knowledge and Infinite. ( Taittiriya Upanishad, Brahman Brahmanand Valli, Black Yajurveda) Prajyanam Brahman( God is consciousness) - Aitreya Upanishad(RigVeda) Sarvam Khalvidam Brahman( Everything is indeed Brahman ie:- Brahman is expressed in each and Everything). It's a Pantheistic concept of God - Chhandogya Upanishad(SamaVeda) Om etad Brahman( AUM is Brahman) - Mandukya Upanishad(Atharva Veda) Om Purnamadah Purnamidam Purnat Purnamudachyate Purnasya Purnamadaya Purnamevavashisyate ”THAT(Brahman) is infinite, THIS(Natural world) is infinite; From That, This comes. THIS added or removed from THAT, the Infinite remains as Infinite. -BRIHADARAYANKA UPANISHAD(WHITE YAJURVEDA)

[@toohdvaetihom7088]

Why does he move around so much? This suggests an distressed mind.

[@konstantinNeo]

Too much junk/duplicate concepts. They all weigh on the mind. Being a scholar is a curse. Too much fanfiction that ''must' be intellectually respected. Lack of a cohesive working model. Its absurd that we havent yet understood what oneness is.

[@indianmilitary]

@@konstantinNeo Truth is very simple but only ego and words complicate it. Correct understanding of Vedic metaphysics is very important. The so called "oneness" is totally overblown by human ego which always looked in awe of duality of less and more omniscient/ omnipotent experience. But the "reality" is always one with its intelligent energy without which nothing can exist or nothing can be perceived in its current form or no duality cycles of nature can happen. So, microcosm = macrocosm.

[@santikim8134]

Perhaps his words are coming through his mouth and simultaneously, dancing through within his body. Jai Shri Krishna

[@pabs8]

Ad hominem

[@beauforda.stenberg1280]

As a Vaishnava, but not only, I often wonder about other Vaishnavas, and specifically Kirtaniyas, and their experience and interiority. As sadhana and devotion, I find experientially in kirtan, that the singer, song and that which is sung about, the bhakta, the bhakti and the Bhagavan, all interpenetrate in a triune, as do the three times and the three worlds. I feel that personalism and impersonalism are just constructs, and deconstructed and reconstructed in sadhana, seva and prema.

[@amindra963]

You are not " doing" anything though.

[@indianmilitary]

Yes. The omnipresent and conscious experiencer is NOT the doer and the doer is not the experiencer. Human ahamkara can never comprehend this unless and until one has at least some level of embodied experience

[@martinslauka]

This man must be nervous, his frequent manipulating of the microphone made me mad and quitting the video

[@pabs8]

Ad hominem.

[@ultrafeel-tv]

What a chaotic drama queen...

[@deadlyninja8391]

Why drama queen? Rajo Guna, he said himself. There is no drama here, only scholastic remarks just get to the essence of his talk ignore other things

[@apoorv219]

It's better to just focus on the material of the talk and try to gain a real understanding of that and just ignore other aspects like speaker's way of talking or other seemingly annoying habits etc. That's my view, I guess. Sometimes I don't even watch the videos and try to focus on listening to the audio alone in these kinds of talks.

[@Destinyofhearts]

@@deadlyninja8391I think they might be speaking about themselves 🫣🤭😂

[@Reach2Sanno]

To each his own. Don’t like it ? Just move on - nobody here will miss you .

[@sudfromindia5763]

Definition of God(Brahman):- yato va imani bhutani jayante . yena jatani jivanti . yatprayantyabhisa.nvishanti . tadvijij~nasasva . tad.h brahmeti That from which these beings are born, That by which, when born, they live, That into which they enter, they merge-seek to know That. That is Brahman.( Varuna to Bhrigu) Taittiriya Upanishadz- 3rd Valli or chapter (Also Taittiriya Aranyaka- 9th chapter), Black Yajurveda..

[@albanveda6448]

Chant Hare Krishna and be happy?

[@hakuin3654]

It is still the question, why are there ever just few people who experienced enlightenment and many psychic developments as well as bliss like Ramakrishna did etc???

[@martinwagner7361]

Is that really so ? By now we could really validate spiritual principles scientifically and statistically sound....it has always been just a minority being capable and interested in overcoming the Trance of dysfunctional Ego... But as the collective Suffering is increasing disillusionment about Ego will grow.... And with a Course in Miracles we have a very experiential path available that has given many people quite an access to own spiritual experience. NearDeathExperiences and research/testimonies have brought hundred thousands on the deep spiritual path in the aftermath of the Experience.... Now on the extremely realized level of Ramakrishna he sure was exceptional already in his time but I am very positive we'll see great Masters and Saints this century....I'm not that pessimistic regarding this.... The spiritual potential of the internet has just begun - and there has already been a great change happening by that for many involved...🙏

[@zotharr]

Because we are 50/50 :p Who is devoted 100 percent? Who wants only Brahma jnana and nothing else?