RATNASHREE | EP [03] | What is Anatma ? | अनात्मा भनेकाे के हाे | BODHI TV

[@blonkimpasang6290]

धेरै कुरा जनियो गुरु जि। Buddhism अखिर विज्ञान रहेछ। विज्ञानसंग तर्क हुन्छ । जुन अन्धविश्वासमा अधारित छैन । येस्तो ज्ञानमय धर्म नचिन्ने हामी बुद्ध जन्मेको देशको नागरिक भएर ठुलो दु:ख लग्यो ।

[@razztamang7291]

विज्ञान त अझै research गर्नु पर्ने हुन्छ तर यि कुरा कहिले नि पर्दैन । अादि फरक

[@tenzingompo5800]

Buddhism is not only religion of faith , Its a mostly a scientic religion

[@Factsraven]

Buddhism is a high level of psychology. That is what I learned reading buddhist texts.

[@blonkimpasang6290]

Khas Gorkha U r right. We need to study abt of Buddhism and practice. Then we get experience sure. What is way of right?

[@Factsraven]

@@blonkimpasang6290 I read time to time. Just finished a book on heart sutra.

[@plusforty6405]

वेद ले भन्दैन । र हिन्दू संप्रदाय देखी हीजो बल्ल वेदान्त संग जोडेको जो आधिरित पूराण स्मृती संग संबन्धित छ । गुरू को ज्ञान र जानकारी असाध्यै नै गजव को लाग्यो मलाई जे छ छ तर सबै कुरा लाई जानार समेट्न साह्रो छ र शंकाराचार्य को तत्वबोध मैले पनी अध्यन गरेको छू र शंकाराचार्य कृत स्तुती प्रकररू पनी । तर जव मलाई नेपाल मा आक्रमण गरी हिन्दू संप्रदाय नेपालको धर्म बन्न पुग्यो आदी कुरा हरू पश्चात मलाई उनको कुनै पनी कुराहरू पड्न चासो लागेन मन पनी परेन 😊 मैले पढ्न बन्द खरि दिए वौद्धिहरू कापालिक शाक्त कौल मार्गी तान्त्रिकहरू मारेको यो त झनै मन मा बिझो कुरा । यसै सिलसिलामा जगद गुरू प्रथा पनी चलेको रहेछ भारत वर्ष भित्र बौद प्रचार नगर्न पाईने थुप्रे कुराहरू रहेछ 😑

[@shivapaudel2996]

An interesting interpretation! Different from Vedanta. However, the core is not conflicting. Ramana Maharshi has also spoken on the difference between Atma and Anatma. Thank you for your marvelous explanation, Gurudev!!!

[@sombahadurghale4996]

धेरै शिक्षाप्रद जानकारी

[@dinapokhrel7353]

हजुर❤ म वैष्णव साकाहारी हु ।तर हिन्दू धर्म मेरो धर्म भए पनि भगवान बुद्धका उपदेश र बज्रयान उपासक मेरो मनको देवता हुन भन्ने लाग्छ

[@premkajibajracharya2725]

Great teaching Guru i respect you Guru, thank you very much.

[@florafeng2748]

dear all would you please attach english translation for us thank you for all by heart.

[@dumbtom6831]

Flora Feng - It is indeed an enlightening talk on non existence of permanent soul. The speaker is very fluent English speaker. I believe, there must be other videos in English.

[@vijaysarga9157]

Sadhu sadhu sadhu Tri Ratna saranam

[@wrongnotes8385]

Indeed Guru..You explained it in simple way.The defination of Anatma or no-self is deeper than it sounds.It takes great knowledge and deeper undersatnding to explain it in complete sense about Anatma.However Hindu pundits find the Buddhist philosphy of Anatma contradictory.The great Nalanda master Nagarjuna laid out the defination of Anatma in advanced and finest way.He was the highly respected Buddhist sage Nalanda ever produced.When Sankaracharya was in his prime time and making his quest to debate with other masters of different faith,Buddhists masters were not around in Indian sub continient. Buddhists sages like Nagarjuna,Dharmakriti,Asanga,Chadrakriti,dignag and various great masters were before Shankaracharya time. I am certain if Buddhist masters were around when Shankaracharya was making his quest in Indian sub continent, Shankaracharya would have been defeated in any level of debates.Eventhough Shankaracharya had enormus success but he was defeated by the great monk when reached to Tibet.Many Hindus do not have this knowledge about Shankaracharya.Shankaracharya was high on his knowledge and had huge ego to bring down Buddha dhamma in every possible way.

[@sal808]

🙏🏾🙏🏻🙏👌👍👌🍉🍇🍍

[@wonderfullife737]

Its not about bringing down another religion or about ego. Everybody has right to propagate their religion as long as Its not forceful or violent. Even buddhist gurus propagated their religion to people who were following other religion. Its okay to do so, it’s okay to win the debate. Everything changes(as this video says).

[@wonderfullife737]

@wrong notes I haven't read anywhere of Shankaracharya demolishing Buddhist shrines in India. can you send me the source where you got this information? and about pushyamitra shunga, he was a politician, not a yogi or sanyasi. and i have seen some Srilankan famous buddhist monks inciting violence in Srilanka against Muslims. Sri Lanka is part of the Indian subcontinent. google bodhi, Bala Sena. so not everything is black and white.

[@RaginYak]

​​@@wonderfullife737 kzbin.info/www/bejne/gaHUgGduYt-Vm5I just watch this recent reversal of 'hindu temple' declared by court to be buddhist temple and given back to buddhist. Remember it had to be contested in court in order to get it back. What you can deduce here is the fact that Buddha idol has been 'hindunised' by staining them with tikkas, malas and crown on buddha head to be undistinguishnable by brahmins. Dont look far, go to Buddha-nilkanth, the name speak for itself, the idol lying there in the water is actual Buddha being turned into 'Vishnu'. There are thousands of such places. Think wisely before giving specious argument - where govt. politics is involved, vested org is involved.

[@sumanlama9070]

मरु लाश्शो,मलाई जान्न मन लागेको कुरा बज्र गरु,च्याङरशि र बुद मा के फरक र कुन शब भन्नदा ठूलो भगवान यश्को भिडियो पनि हालिदिन अनुरो गर्दछु,।

[@sagunsiwakoti4811]

Even Geeta says atma is never born and never dies. I have read something similar in thich thich nhat hanhs writings nirvana is the unborn state free from cause and effect. Even Hindus are confused in the meaning of atma. In-depth analysis.

[@sampatisiran3519]

namo buddhaya namo dharmaya namo guru sanghaya

[@rushabhgurung6942]

Ati ramro rinpoche sadhu sadhu sadhu 3

[@rekhakhadka6360]

साधु साधु साधु।

[@nirmalpakhrin6506]

बुद्धम् शरणम् गच्छामी l धम्म शरणम गच्छामी l संघम् शरणम् गच्छामी नमस्कार गुरु ज्यु

[@tshering7476]

Sarai ramro explan gurula..

[@gauthamsherpa972]

I have curious more extremely to know about this knowledge, thank you 🙏 for explaining it’s grateful to teach Buddha Darma 🙏🙏🙏💐💐💐💐🙇‍♂️🙇‍♂️🙇‍♂️

[@dhanebahadurtamang8061]

great yogi... 🙏🙏🙏🙏

[@sabinatamang1433]

Tashi Delek Rinpochela..🙏🙏🙏🌻Thank you so much.

[@gauleketi98]

Precious teaching

[@VishantaRayamajhi]

Sadhu! Sadhu!! Sadhu!!!

[@kumarsamir1929]

Great. Kati ramro sanga bujhaunu vayo.😊😊😊

[@mayapun4155]

Tasi delek Guru

[@rinchen.19]

Thank you so much rinpoche giving Great knowledge 🙏🙏🙏

[@evanmaharjan2035]

The way to Nirvana is researching into Anitya, Dukha, Anatma.

[@wonderfullife737]

If there is no atma than how come there is rebirth, karma, and what reaches nirvana? What exactly is nirvana? Do we disappear after nirvana? These questions are always in my mind. Please explain thank you 🙏

[@lamashyam1853]

Atma means not we thought as like soul.. its related "I " I" I" as we thought " i " is not depend on nothing. That is illusion. Guru explaining it, not as you thought as like soul. For ur information, soul is not Atma.

[@amritchhetri1799]

Listen carefully, it'll be clear.

[@m.pakhrin2847]

🙏💐🙏 Guru☸

[@blonkimpasang6290]

Oo nice.

[@shumatamang3411]

Great Teaching

[@Factsraven]

Good to hear. Thank you guru!

[@vaskerrajbhandari1053]

सत् चित् आनन्दको प्राप्ति भने को मोक्ष हो बुद्धटो को प्राप्ति हो साधु साधु सुभाषीता

[@bibeksharma270]

Vasker Ji, that is exactly the opposite of what the Rinpoche is saying here. "Sat" in "sat-cit-aananda" means the quality of Atman. It means Atman stays or remains unchanged in the three period of time - past, present and future. That is the claim of Vedic/Vedaantic scchols, which is being refuted by Guru. That is wrong. Buddha says that such unchanging concept of atman is just wrong. Buddhist realize Nirvaana (moksha) by realizing Anaatman, which means they understand thst the mind is impermanent (anitya ie changing moment to moment) and so forth.

[@Max-ty4xm]

🙏🙏🙏🙏

[@chhatralama7051]

maha ypgi guru jiu hajurlai kaha ra kun thauma samparka rakhnu sakinxa malai hajurko darsan vet garnu xa plz batai donus

[@bimalagurung9623]

Great teaching Guru🙏🙏🙏🌺🌺🌺 Thank you very much....

[@sonamtamang725]

Thanks for info

[@pematamang7398]

Guru Debo Bhab Guru Prati Naman

[@aryankarki7900]

sadhu sadhu sadhu.

[@m-file4016]

Ati dhurlabo !! Ati dhurlabo!!

[@GautamLama-m3y]

Mahbir Pani arahaat Ra nimaarn payeya Bhawan vayko vancha jain Dharma ke ho guru

[@subarnamagar3879]

Sadhu sadhu sadhu

[@nirajantamang5837]

great

[@ramlama589]

साधु साधु साधु

[@samirkanx4117]

🥀🥀👏👏👏🥀

[@indratimilsina7713]

sadhu sadhu sadhu..

[@tukrajgurung7994]

Ratna guru g,k guru bina Dhyan Garda Hunxa ki nai,?

[@subashgairhe1479]

🙏🙏🙏💝🎉

[@rajugautam5826]

FACT

[@tenzingsherpa4157]

👍👍👏👏🙏🙏

[@AZ-fs5lr]

🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏❤️

[@GautamLama-m3y]

Mahbir lepani aharat Bhawan vancha

[@khenpotopdenzs9205]

🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻

[@rameshdeuja4338]

pitabhplenarayana narayanabhole matyaswori 2058/2/19 gaterati dharmdrohi rajyadrohi rajadrohi thulo yojana holi woina 17000 parjajan ghataki holi woina icap mccko chelo haru mili sdistiko panchasil ghatagareko daibi parkop corona rogaho pitayamrajko kalpS

[@umeshtamang9178]

🙏🙏🙏😘🌷❤️👌👍👍

[@rabindranathtagore3394]

Comment ma jhagada nagarau hai yesto dharmik kuraharuma baru Tarka sailima kura garnus

[@rjk6773]

Pls watch the explaination of Jaggu Ji bashudev and watch out his life , his definition of paramatma as anatma or ever changing consciousness. So it is useless to talk about which one is better Hinduism or Buddhism in terms of the way or reaching the ultimate. If we listen an illumined or liberated being regardless of their paths either Vedanta or sankhya yog or path of nirvana, we will find no discrimination in terms of their state of attainment and they are always changing and connect with wholeness of presence.....and so on. That is my a little thought but I do not like people saying theirs always better. The ultimate is ultimate in whatever ways people describe so I have immense respect for both paths as long as we get the ultimate sky of our being. I do not mean any disrespect to ratnashree, he is a ratna of Nepal and world as well. I always have a deep respect and gratitude to him and his work.

[@bibeksharma270]

RJ k Ji, Rinpoche is not claiming the superiority or inferiority. He is simply continuing with the Indian tradition of seeking the truth. If you look at Sankharacarya's literature, he has also tried to refute Buddhism. This exchange - refutation and rebuttal, which we call खण्डन-मण्डन is the heart of Indian spiritual tradition to find the truth. What was important was the truth or सत्य so that we can find the liberation or मोक्छ् . That is the highest goal of Indian spiritual tradition. Furthermore, I am not sure whether Jaggi Vasudeva even truely represents Hinduism. He mixes philosophies and is himself not clear about many things. For example, all his explanation about Buddhism is wrong. He doesn't know Buddhism, but he tries to show thst he knows everything. He talks smoothly and sounds logical but that doesn't mean he knows these philosophies well.

[@newpeoplessociety8838]

क्या मिठाे ।।

[@aakashmalla2296]

Rule 1: never believe in anything that has not been in your experience.....if you really look into buddha and many of the people like him, they have really wanted people to experience these things.....as a matter of fact, they gave all their life so that people can experience... but now there are million of people speaking on his name .....a man lived 2500 years agooo and there are millions of people who have said million different things in his name, what is truth has simply been lost on those words and can never be attained through words...

[@tenznordea8983]

That's where his teachings are recorded in a book for thousands of years.

[@rudranikatwal1987]

हिन्दुमा पनि शरिरिक मोर्छाबद्लिन्छ,आत्मा अमर हुन्छ भनेको छ,तोत बुजाउने तरिका र बुजाईमा भर्पर्छ🙏🙏🙏🙏

[@kajimagar3488]

You need to comparison Hindu and Buddhism.Unless and until you reach Arahant you can't understand Anatma.

[@tilakshrestha2573]

Dear Bhante, please allow me to opine. Shankaracharya says Brahman (Not Bahun) is the ultimate reality. From Brahman comes the Sansar (anitya, changing) the world we see. I (ego, jiva, life form) is within Sansar. I (atma, soul) is the Brahman. Brahman is Paramatma (divine, super soul). Atma is Paramatma. That is I (ego) sees itself separate, subject to the law of Karma and worldly happiness\sadness. But I (atma) does not. The spiritual discipline is for I (ego) to realize its true nature - I (atma). Buddha Dharma is strictly an empirical and experiential spiritual discipline. It works within Sansar and does not come with any belief system. This is the real break through of the Buddha dharma. That is, we can achieve Nirvana by working within this Sansar. However, it also means all the teachings has to be within Sansar. That is, within Sansar we have I (ego) but not I (atma). That is the doctrine of 'Anatma.' But please recognize that it is within Sansar. Thus, there is no contradiction between Adwaita and Bauddha Darshans. Also FYI, from Adwaita (Shaiva) came Shankhya (Kapil) Dharma, and from Shankhya came Bauddha Dharma. Siddhartha Gautam was an ordained monk of 'NIrwanee' lineage of the Shankhya school, before attaining Buddhahood. By the way, Buddha Dharma being empirical it is getting popular in the West. After Science, the human inquiry of the world is done with the Buddha Darshan. Because it does not use any 'belief' system. Buddham Sharanam Gachhami.

[@rabindranathtagore3394]

He is not bhante bro

[@bibeksharma270]

Tilakji , you seem to misunderstand the basic principles of Buddhism. According to Buddhism there is no Brahman and the Brahman of Vedāntins is only parikalpita/ fabricated or conceptualized, likened to a “horn of a rabbit.” In another word, Buddhism states that the concept of Ātman/Brahman is a hallucination due to avidhyā (ignorance). So, to say Brahman is beyond samsara is illogical and without any proof. You said, "this Ātman is supposed to be different from I but also I (aham brahmāśmi /tat tvam asi )" ! That is a contradiction. And what is this Atman? According to all forms of Vedanta this Ātman is the Watcher/Draṣṭā , the Witness/Sākṣī, Knower/jñātā. In short, we can call it “Awareness”. Well, the Vedānta tries to posit a mind separate from the Sākṣī/ Ātman but this poses a couple of problems 1) if the mind also knows (through the reflection of the Sākṣī on it) and the Ātman also Knows, there would be two knowers at the same time. Nobody has ever experienced two knowers at the same time and if there really were two knowers there would be a lot of confusion in experiencing things .2) If the mind is changing but the Ātman /Draṣṭā /Sākṣī /jñātā is unchanging (sat), then how does this ātman or whatever knows, as knowing is a function, which means change. An unchanging sat/ Ātman cannot function. Therefore, it cannot be aware of jñeya (viṣaya). Since the Brahman is the Ātman (ayaṃ ātman brahman), what is the use of such a Brahman, which cannot function because it is unchanging/sat. Therefore, it cannot know/witness/see, thus cannot be conscious. Then what is the use of realizing such an unconscious (jaḍa) thing? And, how can an unconscious Brahman liberate us? So, it is inaccurate to say that Buddhism deals only with Samsāra, Brahman is beyond Samsara, and hence, anātman of Buddhism does not apply to Brāhman. It applies to Brahman as well because this Brahman is supposed to be ātman, and by saying anātman, Buddhism is not only trying to negate ego /ahaṁkāra, but the very concept of Ātman of the Vedānta (also called Draṣṭā /Sākṣī /jñātā) too. Since, this Atman is Brāhman ( Ayam ātman brāhman), it also firmly applies to the Brahman. Please remember - Ātman/Brahman/Parabrahman in Buddhism are all parikalpita (a fabricated, conceptualized wrong idea), due to avidyā (ignorance). So, Buddhist analysis encompasses everything that can be analyzed, those within Samsara and those categories like Ātman/Brahman, which are just conceptual, like the horn of a rabbit. Also, what is the historical basis of your saying thus, your quote “from Advaita (Shaiva) came Shankhya (Kapil) Dharma, and from Shankhya came Bauddha Dharma.” Your quote, “Siddhartha Gautam was an ordained monk of 'Nirvanee' lineage of the Shankhya school, before attaining Buddhahood?” Historically, whether Sāṃkhya is older than Vedānta or vice versa is unestablished. They seem to be still being formulated during the time of the Buddha. The Buddha never studied under any Sāṃkhya yogi-s. Neither Buddhist schools nor Vedic/Brahmanical schools ever claim this. In fact, Vedic/Brahmanical schools itself categorize Buddhism as a “nāstika” (heterodox) philosophy against their own orthodox (āstika) schools. Where did you get this crazy idea? The Buddha studied with Alāra kalām and Udraka Rāmputra, who didn’t belong to Sāṃkhya schools. They belonged to Saramaña tradition. Some scholars think that Alāra Kalām might have been a prototype Sāṃkhya, but that too is inconclusive. And, what is more important, attested in Buddhist scriptures clearly, is that the Buddha was not happy with the teachings of these two Sramaña, and hence, rejected their teachings. As a result, he left them and trained himself. At one point, under the Bodhi tree, he attained Nirvāṇa with the help of the path shown by the former Buddhas. Please remember that prior to becoming a Buddha in this life time, Siddhāṛtha Gautama during his career as a Bodhisattva, had trained himself under thousands of Buddhas in his past life. Many people do not know this fact attested in the Buddhist texts. Anyway, his opinion about the path of the former Buddha-s is attested in couple of suttas in Pali nikāya, such as in the Nagara Sutta and the Dhammacakkapavattana Sutta. He himself has clearly said in these suttas that he rediscovered the path of the ancient Buddhas, a path that was unheard of in India during his time. Since, the Sāṃkhya and the older Vedāntas were perhaps already heard of at the time of the Buddha, we can say that the Buddha said it clearly that his teachings were derived neither from Vedānta nor from Sāṃkhya but from the teachings of the ancient Buddhas. And the Sāṃkhya system doesn’t use the word Nirvāṇa in the entire kārikā-s. Let me reiterate - even the orthodox schools of Vedic/Brāhmanical/Hindu schools do not make this claim. And, let me remind you that these schools were contemporaneous to the Buddha himself. The fact that they make it clear that Buddha Dharma is nāstika system, and that they attempt to ‘refute’ it from the point of view of their own philosophical system makes it clear that Buddha Dharma was a unique system in ancient India, not related with Vedic/Brāhmanical tradition such as Sāmkhya. And by the way, what is the basis of your saying that the Buddhism is only empirical? This is totally wrong. These are the wrong interpretation introduced to modern age by some Protestant Buddhists. Whatever empirical is conceptual, and that which is free of concepts /avikalpa is not empirical and the Buddhist Bodhi is beyond empirical as it is free of concepts (avikalpa).

[@norjangsyangden3856]

अनात्माको ज्ञानले हामीलाई म ठोस रुपमा छु भन्ने अज्ञानतालाई उच्छेद गर्नमा सहयोग पुर्याउँछ। म भन्ने पकड़को भाव वास्तवमा बिभिन्न कारण परिस्थिति अनि अवस्थाले बनाउँद रहेछ। अंग्रेजीमा भन्न पर्दा interdependence, interconnectedness cause and condition बाट सिर्जिएको हुँदा रहेछ यो म, यो नाम, यो शरीर अनि जीवन। एउटा सिनेमा भन्ने धारणा नाम जस्तो हो यो म को पकड़भाव। सिनेमा अथवा मुभी भन्ने सत्य र ठोस हो। तर सिनेमाको अस्तित्व बन्नलाई अरु कति कति कुराको उपस्थिति चाहिन्छ। अभिनय कला भएका मानिसहरु, क्यामेराम्यान अनि सहयोगीहरु, कथा र स्क्रिप्ट लेख्नेहरु, संवाद अनि गीत लेख्नेहरु, गाउनेहरु बजाउनेहरु, मेक अप म्यान रसहयोगीहरु, इडिटिङ गर्ने मान्छे र ल्याब, किसिमका मशिन र यसका टेक्निशियनहरु, नाँच सिकाउने र फाइट सिकाउनेहरु, निर्देशकहरु अनि समान ल्याउने लाने दल, डाँडाकाँडा नदी सागर भूमि आकाश गाडी घोडा। इत्यादि इत्यादि इत्यादि। के राम्रो सिनेमा अथवा मुभी भन्छौँ। तर यो मूभीको निर्माणमा एउटा दुनियाँ नै लाग्दो रहेछ। यो म, यो आत्मा, यो शरीर , यो संज्ञा पनि यस्तै हो। कल्पनाले पनि सोंच्न नसक्ने इत्यादि इत्यादि इत्यादि इत्यादिका कार्य कारणले यो म यो आत्माको धारणा बनिएको हो। अनात्माको ज्ञानले शुन्यताको ज्ञान हुन्छ शुन्यताको ज्ञानले करुणा उत्पन्न हुन्छ। यही करुणाले आफूसहित सम्पूर्ण चराचर अनि प्राणीहरुलाई अज्ञानताको दुखचक्रमा भटकिरहेका देख्न सक्षम बनाउँदछ। यहीँबाट एउटा मान्छेले संसिद्धिको जीवनयात्रा आरम्भ गर्दछ। फलत: एउटै मात्र यस्तो मान्छेको उपस्थितिद्वारा यो समाज, यो संसार अनि पर्यावरण नदेखिने पाराले लाभान्वित भइरहेको हुन्छ। यो अनात्मा आध्यात्मिक विज्ञान हो। यो मार्ग बौद्ध दर्शन होला भलै। विज्ञानको दृष्टिले यो मार्ग सबै सबै जिज्ञासुका लागि पनि हो। नम:मञ्जुश्री।

[@norjangsyangden3856]

Public reply

[@santamanrai5432]

जब आत्मा छैन भने मान्छे मरि सके पछि हिन्दुले जस्तै बौद्धले पनि अनेक मृतकको नाउमा गरिने नाटक हरु के हो त ? जब मरि सके पछि केही छैन भने गरिने कृयाकलाप वा नाटक हरु के हो त ? केवल मानिसलाइ बेबकुफ बनाएको हो त ? तपाईं आफैले प्रयोग गर्नु भएको शब्द आत्म हत्या , चित दुखाइ को उदाहरण दिउं त्यो आत्महत्या गर्ने बिचार र चित दुखाउने तत्व के हो ? आत्मनै छैन भने यो कुरा लासमा किन हुदैन ? ढुंगामा किन हुदैन ? प्राणी भनिने चिजमा मात्र किन हुने ? हो त्यो चिज के हो ? देखिने चिज मात्र सत्य अरु सबै असत्य भन्ने हो भने सबै धर्महरुलाइ खारेज गरेर आध्यात्मवाद छोडेर भौतिक वाद्को पछि लागे भै गो नि ! भौतिक वादले यहि भन्छ ।

[@narsinghrai4497]

Sir tapai hindu ko kun marg ma hunu hunch

[@otakusenpai7109]

According to lord Buddha the soul (spirit) exists but it is not fixed or permanent ( immortal) in this world

[@umeshtamang9178]

कुरा नबुजेसम्मन् किन भुक्नु परो k pheri ,,, paila Buddhist संबंधित अध्ययन गर्नु अनि भन्नु k

[@amritchhetri1799]

Sathi this very interesting, ekiplta ma bujdaina , jaba bujxa it'll blow your mind. Keep learning.

[@thaisontong6992]

Sadhu! Sadhu!! Sadhu !!!

[@shreeta1886]

🙏🙏🙏

[@sangpolama7793]

🙏🙏🙏