Acharya-re, you have explained this complex question in such a simple and an elegant way 🙏
@SriVyaasaDaasa6 жыл бұрын
Really nice... Conduct polls for the questions to be asked to Acharyaru, you will get more number of questions and better questions to ask
@VedicDiscourses6 жыл бұрын
Good idea. Will check it out for the next video.
@nagarajarao54604 жыл бұрын
H ohk hi IGI gf IGI hi oh ugh ohk ugh Kgf gun huh ugh g Kunj h ugh ugh IGI ugh IGI Hb jk ugh oh uh jk hi IGI h jk hi IGI g jk ugh jk ugh Khufu high Hb j h jk hv km gf jk hi ugh IGI gf jk ugh jk gf h
@wizardofrosss6 жыл бұрын
Acharyare, thanks so much for doing this. The current generation needs guiding lights like you. One follow up question that comes up, and is in a lot of debates in the secular/science crowds is if you take back the theory of causation further and further back to the one creator, then what caused the creator? Why does the same law of causality that brought us to that point stop there? Wouldn’t that lead to an infinite regress again? I’m sure there is an answer in our shastras, but we just do not know it. Kindly enlighten.. 🙏🏽
@VedicDiscourses6 жыл бұрын
Good point. I'll take this up with Acharyaru in our next meet. I think we can make a short follow up video for this question. Thanks for raising this point.
@GururajBN5 жыл бұрын
It would be greatly helpful if the Acharya can deliver a detailed talk on Sandhyavandana, from start to finish, explaining every mantra and gesture performed. Most of us practice by rote, without knowing the significance of what we do.🙏🏽
@VedicDiscourses5 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the suggestion. For most of us, Sandhyavandane has become a chore that's done very mechanically. I'll have a discussion with acharya to see if we can have mantra by mantra explanations.
@sachinkulkarni19455 жыл бұрын
When I finished listening the first thought that came to me was about Sandyavandana and its procedures. Also, what do we follow Rigveda or Yajurveda...also please explain the mudras and the rest. Thank you very much. My Shastang Namaskar to Achararu. 🙏💐🙏
@vinayj.r64703 жыл бұрын
Crazy explanation !!! agree on cause and effect. Bigbang theory does not explain the organized way, the world is running in. Defenetely, there is a huge spiritual energy behind the origin of this materialistic universe as explained here. Very interesting explanation.
@subhrodiprakshit89233 жыл бұрын
Big bang just try to explain the state of this universe from a perception of concentration. .....
@prakashgvt75422 жыл бұрын
Hare Krishna 🙏🏻🙏🏻
@barathvenkatachalam7068 Жыл бұрын
🙏🙏🙏
@tulsiveda8776Ай бұрын
Excellent clarification 👌
@shrinidhisinganamalli46233 жыл бұрын
What a beautiful conclusion science only discribes how not why.
@VenkateshaS3 жыл бұрын
ಶ್ರೀ ಗುರುಭ್ಯೋ ನಮಃ #VenkateshaS
@RajaRam-vj5hx7 ай бұрын
🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🙏🙏🙏🙏🌹🌹🙏
@mr.greengold82362 жыл бұрын
1:44 what is the source of that Shloka?
@sudhanvakulkarni42 Жыл бұрын
Acharya Madhwas Dwadasha Stotra 3rd adhyaya
@mr.greengold8236 Жыл бұрын
@@sudhanvakulkarni42Thank you.
@3230samantha2 жыл бұрын
Excellent guruge
@yskmovies2 жыл бұрын
I am from andhara Subtitles please
@VedicDiscourses2 жыл бұрын
Sorry... we could not find anyone to take up the task.
Cause and effect is mind's conception and reasoning. That cannot be basis for existence of god.
@subhrodiprakshit89233 жыл бұрын
Oh.... Cause and effect is just mind's conception and reasoning? Is it just that? 😁😁😁😁😁oh no! That means you are writing a note..... There us no cause and effect... Just mind's conception brother? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣oh no! That means you are writing a note is completely unreal and nobody is actually here? 🤔🤔🤔🤔 How funny! Listen brother... We are real... This world is real abd yes we are doing something.. Also that is also real...that means cause and effect is also real.... Is it not just case of man mind's conception... Rather it is mind's understandings of it..... Not anymore a delusion... And if you have any problem that people are using reasoning to understand this fact.. Then I feel sorry for you.. What a bogus crying.... Human mind is for understanding... It is true..... Everything which began to exist had a cause... This universe began to exist... So it has its cause... And likewise all have a primordial supreme cause... Lord Hari is the cause for all..... That's why he is sarva karana karanam...
@subhrodiprakshit89233 жыл бұрын
@@immadiPatheshwara existence of God is due to delusional consciousness of mind? Is it brother? I feel sorry for you... 😁😁😁😁
@phadnis36153 жыл бұрын
@@subhrodiprakshit8923 What is definition of "real"? Can you illuminate with your wisdom please?
@sameerkulkarni832525 күн бұрын
I've listened plenty to him, and have observed that his distinguishing point is that he gives proof of existence of supernatural beings, by drawing analogy to man made and societal structures and systems. Firstly, an analogy is not a proof, as we can prove just about anything by changing the metaphor. For example, for his claim that there's only one God, he gives as "proof", the example of how there can only be one judge, one president, one etc,. But then what is stopping you from saying, there are many nations, therefore there many presidents, there is no single time zone, so there can't a single God, etc etc.. who's to decide which analogy is right. Secondly, his understanding of the scientific method is seriously lacking. He makes such bold claims by way of justifying which he gives nothing the can be tested empirically. Proof of what's not visible should be perceptible otherwise physically. For example, the famous argument is you can't see air, so how can you say there's air. But but we know air exists because we can understand it mathematically, and demonstrate its properties precisely. What experiments that can be repeated by anyone at any time do you have to claim there's a God? In response to the argument that there has to be a creator for everything, then that creator itself also can have a creator, and him in turn have a creator forming never ending chains?
@VedicDiscourses25 күн бұрын
True. One can indeed derive opposite conclusions through different methods of application of logic & analogies. Dr. Prabhanjanacharya himself has talked about this on various occasions. That's the difference between pravachana & paata. Pravachanas are not meant to get into the technical aspects. Paatas do. The analogies are there to strengthen the paata and not the other way round. In order to delve deep into how exactly God is proved, we have to go through the process which usually starts with the questions as to what passes as truth, what can be considered as evidence etc - the darshana shastras. The questions as to the creator's creator, proof of existence based on sense perception, validity of so-called God-made or man-made scriptures, possibility of a non-existing creator (a dead God), the possibility of collective chaos that drives life etc (a lot more) - are taken up in painstaking detail in the texts - the scriptures and the subsequent commentaries on the same by the different acharyas over time. If you are interested, I suggest BNK Sharma's Brahmasutra Bhashya and their principal commentaries which is a 3 volume book with commentaries from three disciplines. Sri Jayatheertha, Sri Vadiraja & Sri Vyasarajaru's works extensively elaborate on these and a multitude of other concepts painstakingly.
@purumr2 жыл бұрын
Who created the god then ? If god always exists without cause , then why not just say matter always exists without any creator ? This guy is just saying consciousness is god, and changing the definition of god, making straw man argument.
@VedicDiscourses2 жыл бұрын
By definition, God (paramatma) & us (atmas) were never created. We have always existed and will continue so. It's like time or space or matter (energy) having a creator - they don't have one and they have always existed. Matter too can never be created or destroyed. The person answering is not a random 'guy'. The acharya is merely being the messenger in conveying what is said in the scriptures. Of course, we are all entitled to form our opinions otherwise.
@purumr2 жыл бұрын
@@VedicDiscourses it is like saying bible is true because bible says it is true, circular reasoning without any proof or reasonable evidence.
@VedicDiscourses2 жыл бұрын
@@purumr Edit: Not exactly. Truth can be experienced and truth is something that sustains. So, no amount of brain washing by books or otherwise can ever sustain. And experience need not always come under the purview of material proofs. For example, there were people who deduced that bodies rot because of minute organisms, before the invention of the microscope. It's not that micro-organisms didn't exist before microscopes, for example. So, we need not be so quick in dismissing texts, unless our experience proves otherwise.
@purumr2 жыл бұрын
@@VedicDiscourses first person subjective experiences can prove the subjective experience unless we are talking about cases like mental disorder. I am not denying it. But first person subjective experience can't be the basis for making objective claims about cosmology, God, etc
@VedicDiscourses2 жыл бұрын
@@purumr The point of experience came into picture as a means to verify the truth stated in the texts. There's an entire discussion on what constitutes as proof when it comes to philosophy as the subject matter isn't as simple as arriving at it through sight, smell, touch or taste. Basically, it comes down to anumana (logic), agama (texts) & pratyaksha (verifiable through our common senses) - these have to sit right with sakshi (or experience, to term it crudely). For example, if I say that the Sun will rise at 6:15 tomorrow, you can verify it with agama (google forecasted time), use anumana to check if google forecasts have been true before with the probability of it being true tomorrow and finally, with pratyaksha, you can verify the statement at the time of 6:15 tomorrow, which will sit right with sakshi or experience. To put the 4 definitions crudely. Taking the same concepts, the scriptures are ascertained. Faith need not be set aside as a bad thing. For example, even though most of us have not done a paternity or a maternity test (again, with faith in the Science behind it, faith in the particular people involved & faith in the machines involved), we are unquestionably certain that we are in truth about who our parents are. As said, we need not wait for the invention of a microscope to arrive at micro-organisms' existence. Those means of truths and the ways to verify & experience them is part of the journey in realizing the ultimate. God is something that can be experienced (let's take anumana or logic). The proof that some sort of governance exists in an area is verifiable by the roads, the commute buses/trains or the water & electricity supply in that area. Similarly, this orderly chaos that exists in the world is undeniably under governance. No wonder we can predict the sunrise a year from now. Now, one can attribute that intelligence to matter. But, matter in itself isn't an actor. It's like saying that artificial intelligence came about on its own, without any form of human interference. Intelligence is an attribute of life. There's intelligence in the elements of the periodic table. One element doesn't behave like the other. One can say that it comes about naturally - but the way it's designed to come about naturally requires intelligence. Like a motion sensing bulb (matter) designed to naturally come on when it detects motion - Matter in itself isn't an actor and intelligence is an attribute of life. For a bit of perspective, let's look at it from another angle. We all know that there's hierarchy of intelligence among species. For a dog, the automatic change in traffic signal lights would seem like a natural event and it's highly improbable for the most intelligent dog on the planet to arrive at the concept of a government being voted in to maintain a system like that. Considering organic life as we know it, the number of earth-like planets in our galaxy is estimated to be around 30 billion and such galaxies (deduced from what's been observable alone) are estimated to be about 200 billion. It would probably be naive to assume that human beings are the most intelligent species or the only existing ones, & the concept of denying/accepting truths based purely on pratyaksha &/or anumana (discounting sakshi & agama). I'm afraid there's a lot more to be discussed and I know KZbin comments can't really do justice to such a discussion. I have briefed as best as I could.
@venkateshrjoshi50516 жыл бұрын
ಭಗವಂತನ ಜೀವನಲ್ಲಿ ಬಿಂಬನಾಗಿ ಸಾದ ಇದ್ದಾನೆ ಅಲ್ವಾ ಅನಾದಿ ಕಾಲದಿಂದ ಅಲ್ವಾ ಹಾಗಾದರೆ ಒಂದು ಪ್ರಶ್ನೆ ಏನೆಂದರೆ..... .. ಭಗವಂತನು ನವ ನಾರಿ ಕುಂಜರನ ಹಾಗೆ ಇದ್ದಾನೆ ಅಲ್ವಾ ಅವನಿಗೆ ಸ್ವಾಕ್ಯ ರಸನೆ ಸ್ವಿಕಾರ ಮಾಡುತ್ತಾನೆ so ಬಿಂಬ ರೂಪ ಮೂಲ ರೂಪದಲ್ಲಿ ಸೇರಿದರೆ ಜೀವಿಗಳು ಅಸತ್ಯ ವಾಗುತ್ತವೆ ಆದರೆ ಬಿಂಬ ರೂಪ ಹೇಗೆ ಬಂತು ಮೊದಲು ? I mean ಬಿಂಬ ರೂಪ ಮೂಲ ರೂಪದಿಂದ ಹೇಗೆ ವಿಭಂಜನೆ ಆಯಿತು
@VedicDiscourses6 жыл бұрын
ಇದು ಆಳವಾಗಿ ವಿಚಾರ ಮಾಡಬೇಕಾದಂತಹ ವಿಷಯ. ಬಿಂಬ ಪ್ರತಿಬಿಂಬ ಭಾವದ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಚರ್ಚೆಯ ಶೈಲಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ವೀಡಿಯೋ ಮಾಡಬೇಕೆಂದು ಅಂದುಕೊಂಡಿದ್ದೇನೆ - ಶ್ರೀ ಕಾಂತೇಶಾಚಾರ್ಯ ಕದರಮಂಡಲಗಿ ಅವರೊಡನೆ.