GFO2020: The fascinating question: To whom does ignorance belong? by Swāmi Chidānanda

[@nithyamenon5805]

One of the most honest person who has the courage to look at Truth unflinchingly both as the beneficent Shiva and the fierce Rudra...namasthe

[@balagopalramakrishnan8048]

It was a very enlightening talk. As rightly said, ignorance being the state of lack of knowledge, the ONLY way to remove it is by gaining 'jnanam'. If one has the ignorance of, say, Chinese language, one has to learn it from a person who knows the language well and also has the skill of teaching it. Just by repeatedly saying, what's Chinese language, a person will either falls asleep or will soon realise his folly and abandon that 'sadhana'. Hence the 'prasthaanathRayam'. Mundaka Upanishad Mantra 1.2 12 is a 'pRamANa'.

[@balagopalramakrishnan8048]

The same question answered by Swami Sarvapriyananda tackles it using dialectics of vedanta. In short, gain knowledge that will automatically remove the ignorance that prompted the question.

[@ravir2781]

ಪೂರ್ವಪಕ್ಷಿಯ ಪ್ರಶ್ನೆ :- ಅವಿದ್ಯೆ ಯಾರಿಗೆ? ಸಿದ್ಧಾಂತಿಯ ಉತ್ತರ:- ಕೇಳುತ್ತಿರುವ ನಿನಗೆ ಎಂದು ಹೇಳುತ್ತೇವೆ. ಪೂರ್ವ ಪಕ್ಷಿ:- ಶಾಸ್ತ್ರವು ಹೇಳುತ್ತದೆ ನಾನು ಬ್ರಹ್ಮ ಎಂದು. ಸಿದ್ಧಾಂತಿ:- ನೀನು ಹಾಗೆ ತಿಳಿದುಕೊಂಡಿರುವಿಯಾದರೆ ಅವಿದ್ಯೆ ಯಾರಿಗೂ ಇಲ್ಲ. ಇಲ್ಲದಿರುವ ಅವಿದ್ಯೆ ಯಾರಿಗಿದೆ ಎನ್ನುವ ಪ್ರಶ್ನೆಯೇ ಸರಿಯಲ್ಲ ಏಕೆಂದರೆ ವಿದ್ಯಾ ವಿದ್ಯೆಗಳೆರಡೂ ಅವಿದ್ಯೆಯ ವ್ಯಾಪ್ತಿಯಲ್ಲಿಯೇ ಬರುತ್ತವೆ. ಬ್ರಹ್ಮವು ಅವಿದ್ಯಾವಿದ್ಯೆಗಳನ್ನು ಗಳನ್ನು ಮೀರಿದ್ದಾಗಿರುತ್ತದೆ. ಶಾಸ್ತ್ರವು ಅವಿದ್ಯೆ ಯನ್ನು ಅದ್ಯಾರೋ ಪಿಸಿ ವಿದ್ಯೆಯಿಂದ ಅದನ್ನು ಅಪವಾದ ಮಾಡಿ ತದನಂತರ ವಿದ್ಯೆ ಅವಿದ್ಯೆ ಎರಡೂ ಇಲ್ಲದ ನಿರ್ವಿಶೇಷ ಪರತತ್ವವೇ ಬ್ರಹ್ಮ ಅದೇ ನೀನು ಎಂದು ಬೋಧಿಸುತ್ತದೆ

[@kalyanchaithanya7460]

Hari Om! May pujya gurudev's grace and blessings flow through us to the world around us.Swamiji,your voice echoes the clarity of intellect, which penetrates internally,residing there wanting nothing more.

[@viswanathangr6889]

🙏🌻🙏Pranams to Guruji !!

[@drvbcchikanargund3823]

Summaniru is the state of Jivanmuktas. Dr.V.B.Chikkanaragund

[@drvbcchikanargund3823]

Bhumanand can discuss about Advaita Siddhantha. Dr.V.B.Chikkanaragund

[@paramarthsadhaksanghkashi4106]

Om namo narayanaya Swamiji . Beautifully explained . But there is also a empirical approce in Vedanta that it appears in Brahman or jeeva . Thank you . Happy to hear from you after many years .

[@kraghunathan2450]

Is this upanyasam delivered in the framework of avidya or from outside it?

[@ravir2781]

Guide-Lines to Shankara-Vedānta

[@ravir2781]

Please go through this link

[@regardsk3815]

Where is the Avidya is a valid question? Why?- You say " Jeeva is Brahman" - Jeeva is part of illusion or avidya So Jeeva under illusion keep asking this question where is avidya? Since he cannot find the answer? you say it is wrong question. You suggest eliminate this avidya so you wont question. Now tell us how to eliminate this avidya to avoid this wrong question by a jeeva who is part of the illusion but superimposed on Brahman. Screen is Brahman and cinema or V game is Illusion- Who puts off the cinema? Don't say cinema will put off by itself? or Brahman is putting off? If you say Brahman is putting off then it was experiencing the cinema which you may not accept. Cinema puts off the cinema by itself then cinema will not vanish. Fire cannot put off the fire. If the question is asked within the cinema it is valid question. Such question is raised because opponent encourage this question within the realm of cinema or illusion. Whole concept of illusion is accepted in your philosophy to account this diversity. Also you accept this as different from Brahman and establish the duality.

[@ravir2781]

Guide-Lines to Shankara-Vedānta

[@ravir2781]

Please go through this link

[@regardsk3815]

Respected Sir, People will abstain from asking this question to Sankara Philosopher where does this Avidya reside in Brahman or Jeeva? Why you self-contradict your own philosophy- You already said in your explanation that except Brahman nothing else exist. Brahman is only pure consciousness. Thus there is only one entity and nothing second to it. Then why you talk about the concept apart from the Brahman? when you talk about this concept how did you think about this concept along with nature of Brahman? Yourself say that Brahman appears as something ? what does Brahman appears as? What is this superimposition? Avidya cannot superimpose on one self. It needs Brahman which is opposite to it? At same time you say Brahman is not affected. You say that Vedanta Vakhya are contemplated to remove Illusion or imagination. This vedanta is part of avidya or Brahman? Your philosopher cannot teach to remove this illusion and explain the concept of Superimposition etc? Your are describing something called illusion (all characters in the game) apart from Brahman right? how did you describe this in your philosophy when you already say that Apart from Brahman nothing exist? Without accepting the concept of illusion which is indescribable in your philosophy you cannot describe all these You are saying Individual aspirant and others are frame of Illusion which needs to be dropped? Then dropping is also in the frame of work of illusion because you already said that Brahman is the adhistana like the cinema screen where the movie is on. The Movie will never cease to stop. The destroyer and destroyed cannot be identical since the two are incompatible. Fire cannot remove fire. If you say Brahman is removing. Then why did not remove the avidya before? Yourself say that Individual jeeva is part of Avidya but you equate this with Brahman finally. What does it implies? if you say it disappears on Avidya itself? then Avidya will still remain? when will avidya totally disappear? So it has to appear only then to disappear. If you say avidya never appear at all, what are you talking about like illusion, frame, cinema, some game? How will you eliminate the Illusion or stop the cinema to leave Brahman alone or screen alone ? Sankara philosophy faces logical fallacy- they declare and self- contradict their own philosophy. Whole substratum of Sankara philosophy will shake if this question is asked. So they try to escape this by saying it as "wrong question- and try to offend and shock the questioner by saying that he is ignorant". Ramanuja, Madhva, Vallabha, Nimbarka, Chaitanya, Ramakarishna all have only partially accepted Sankaracharya. They corrected some of his explanation in a more logically, emotionally and rationally by analysing the same Upanishads, Brahmasutra and Gita.

[@ravir2781]

Please go through this

[@regardsk3815]

@@ravir2781 Have you mentioned anything to go through?

[@ravindramurthy3486]

Unless one is familiar with the unique methodology of teaching of Vedanta viz. Adhyaropa and Apavada, one is likely to go through the confusion/doubts that you have expressed. Because the uniqueness of the subject matter of Vedanta (WHICH IS ABOUT "I"), the SEERS OF TRUTH, have outlined a very unique methodology to convey the Truth. Without the PERSONAL guidance of a competent teacher who is familiar with the traditional methodology of teaching, it will be highly unlikely that one would be able to cognize the TRUTH outlined in Advaita Vedanta.

[@regardsk3815]

@ravindramurthy3486 This is a silly explanation. Please read sri bhasyam of Ramanujacharya, who has analysed the shankaracharya explanation and listed the defects. Next, read vedanta desika work regarding this. Madhvacharya's mayavadakhandana. Vadiraja's yuktimalika. Works of vallabhacharya regarding mayavada khandana. If you have not studied the works of other vedanta schools, you won't understand fallacies in shankaracharya advaita explanation. Shankara says- Teaching , teacher, and taught all are real within the domain of unreal illusion. Brahman is not knowable because the knower itself does not exist. This is nothing but trying to prove one own mother is barren woman.

[@regardsk3815]

@ravindramurthy3486 you should ask your advaita teacher, adhyaropa means concealment of Brahman. What is concealed in Brahman? Is it whole of Brahman or part of Brahman? If Brahman is concealed, how can it be called witnesses? How can they say Brahman is a Sakshi? Who is declaring that Brahman is shakshi? Is this concealment real or unreal? All these are not addressed at all in shankara philosophy. Shankaracharya himself says this superimpostion itself is not unreal. Like one has fake sickness. Shankaracharya and disciples realize souls, which does not mean that they can give a defect philosophy.

[@pinakibhome3075]

obliged to hear your blessed words guruji !! Thanks for the wisdom in such simple words.