Hindu Religious Philosophy 1/4
Vložit
- čas přidán 28. 08. 2024
- Want to support our work? Make a donation here: ko-fi.com/ochs...
The first part of a lecture by Dr Nick Sutton. Part of the Oxford Centre for Hindu Studies Continuing Education Department's online initiative.
ochsonline.org/
May everyone understands it the way as you did! Otherwise, people just start judging without acquiring any knowledge!
Great stuff!
Thank you Dr Sutton for uploading these videos on youtube.
you r right when you say sankhya(Gujrati Lady thing) means usually numbering usually this school of thought is know widely as "Samakhya" rather than "Sankhya"(correct)सांख्य(devnagri in ur machine!),the bindu at the top is the anuswar ,actually its a "Ma" sound but as its followed by "Kha" its pronounced as "na" thats why all people who know but not know well call out "Sanskrit" whereas its "Samskrit" sams krit "well Constructed"
Nevertheless this is an amazing video..
OM Shanti.
Great professor
to imagine that all those books behind him are in his head.
According to 'Patanjali' 'Atma' is 'akartA' but it is 'bhoktA' Consciousness are many, 'I' is ever divisible therefore there are many 'Atma'. :) Rejectable part of 'yoga darShanam' is 'nirvikalpaka samAdhi'. 'Yoga' concentrates on the central theme of 'nirvikalpaka samAdhi'. 'Patanjali' propounded that 'Advaita' experience is true and it can be achieved by 'nirvikalpaka samAdhi'. Patanjali is the exponent of a philosophy which talks about 'dvaitam', which clearly says that 'Atmas' are many.
@NFah43Bk May be it would be clearer to say the yogic word referred to here is Saankhya, while the count performed on the bus gives the number whih is the word "sankhyaa"
Therefore it is clear that the nirvikalpaka samadhi which he expounded never helped him in gaining Advaitic experience or confirming 'Advaitic' knowledge, his claim about nirvikalpaka samadhi confirming Advaitic knowledge has no basis whatsoever. Hence, nirvikalpaka samadhi can never confirm or give Advaitic knowledge. One should remember that "AShTanga yoga" is a non-essential feature. Values are important not 'Asana Siddhi'. You need not be an expert in 'prANAyAma' none of them are necessary.
"hindus lives and rule world when even greece did not exist,When jesus or mohammed was not born rome was not thought of,when the very fathers of modern europeans lived in forest and painted themselves blue.Even earlier,when history has no record and tradition dare not peer into gloom-ideas after ideas have marched out from here Hindustan(india),but every words has spoken with a blessing behind it and peaace before it"
FOREVER LIVE LOVE! FOREVER LIVE PEACE! FOREVER LIVE HINDUISM! OM TAT SAT.
Being a hindu I suggest not to demean other culture . It is against the principles of snatan dharma. You are doing disservice to Indian culture and Hindus.
You're defaming Hinduism by demeaning other cultures
@meatcannon. Incorrect.
a. There is really no such thing as "Hinduism". The British invented this.
b. The Vedic scriptures and post vedic (Vedanta) actually define "I", "God" and the "Universe". The teachings mostly say that the mind is simply a layer on "I" and its illusory.
c. Saying this is made by Mother India is like insulting the scriptures that prescribe that this is meant for all humanity and that being attached to something is what suffering is about
***** Namaste back. I stand corrected. About "Hinduism". You are also right about the Vedas. Adi Sancaracharya actually commented on the Brahma Sutras saying that even the Vedas are invalid since they are material. Once understood its a process of "self" inquiry and "self" realization. But the real point is that the teachings of any religion are insufficient and actually damaging in many ways. It drifts away from the concept of subjective introspection and contemplation. Fascinating it is, but from a perspective of how damaging it has been.
sk4forum "Adi Sancaracharya actually commented on the Brahma Sutras saying that even the Vedas are invalid since they are material" - This is surely an invention of British looters and their evangelists and they did not even spare Adhi Shankara lol. Brother, your civilization (Hindu/India) was under foreign invasions for 800 yrs and your Hindu ancestors were slaves. Motives of invaders were pretty clear. Loot, demonize and distort (hinduism and its scriptures), create a vacuum and fill in with Christianity (done initially by inquisitions later by deception) or Islam (by sword) and keep Hindus as slaves for another 800 yrs
Distortions of Hindu/vedic scriptures like creation of fake gods (like Radha), fake kings (Ashoka - as if he converted to Buddhism from bad hinduism), fake poets (Kalidasa), , fake verses (like vulgar, fake animal sacrifices (in purva mimamsa), vedas negating verses like the one you quoted above, vedic people ate beef etc). British east india company looters or bankers also created a fake, one dimensional materialistic (GODLESS OR ATHEIST) philosophy for the world not just India - called Charvaka Philosophy - live a materialistic life even if you have to take a loan. They added this fake philosophy as the first chapter in the long list of Indian philosophies, in the 19th century. Who do think the owners of WALL STREET or all the major big banks around the world? Same owners who owned British east India company who looted Hindu civilization for 300 yrs.
Purva Mimamsa Sutras was also injected with anti-vedas bullshit by British east India company looters. The white invader POISON INJECTED and back dated Mimamsa which says that Vedas could not have been authored by SEERS. Sorry, till the white invader came to India ,we never heard of Rishi Jamini of 200 BC. Maharishi Jaimini the disciples of Maharishi Vyasa, the author of Mahabharata ( 4000 BC ) , existed thousands of years earlier.
Hindu/vedic high philosophies have always been an oral tradition in India. So neither immoral white invaders nor post independence Indians who follow imported western ideologies (like communism/socialism and secularism), realized that nobody can dilute the integral philosophical unity of average Indians who live mostly in villages. But confused city folks are exposed to bullshit through Television. 70% of Indians who live in villages would never believe in the distorted bullshit you quoted.
Yes many periods.
Vedic Period, Upanishadic Period, Puranic Period, Tantric Period, Bhakti Period.
Different strands and also lots of communities, overlaps and separation
Monotheism, polymorphic monotheism, henotheism, polytheism, monism, dualism, personalism, impersonalism.
Samkhya, Vedic Srauta Ritualists in Andhra Pradesh, Vaikhanasa Brahmins, Sri Vaishnavas in Tamil Nadu, Tengalai, Vadakalai, Gaudiya Vaishnavas, Gaudiya Math, ISKCON, Arya Samaj, Brahmo Samaj, Neovedanta, Ramakrishna Mission, Bengali Shaktism, Kali Kula, Trika Shaivism, Kashmir Shaivism, Goraknath Sampraday, Madhvacharya Dvaita, Adi Shankara Advaita, Maharashtra Varkari Sampraday, Swaminarayan, Ramanandi Sect, Nath Yoga, Hatha Yoga, Panchsakha Sampradaya in Orissa, Nimbarka Sampradaya, Pushtimarg, Vallabhacharya Sampradaya, Kundalini Yoga, Tantra, Smarta Brahmin Sampradaya, Aghori Sampradaya, Sadhu, Ramnami Samaj, Ashtanga Yoga, Sahajiya Vaishnavism, Purva-Mimamsa, Samkhya, Yoga Darshana, Vedanta, Nyaya, Vaisheshika
Different texts - Mahabharata, Devi Mahatmya, Ashtavakra Gita, Bhagavad Gita, Bumi Gita, Uddhava Gita, Devi Mahatmya, Devi Gita, Ishvara Gita, Bhagavata Purana, Vishnu Purana, Kurma Purana, Garuda Purana, Skhanda Purana, Upanishads, Rgveda, Samaveda, Yajurveda, Atharvaveda, Ramayana, Chaitanya Charitamrita, Mumukshupaddi, Tantra Loka, Gita Bhasya, Vedanta Sutra, Patanjali Yoga Sutras, Tiruvaymoli, Pancaratra Agama, Shaiva Tantra, Shakta Tantra, Samkhya Karika
Different practices: Agnihotra, Soma, Yagña, Puja, Diksha, Upanayanam, Samskaras, Archana, Japa, Kirtanam, Smaranam, Sharanagati, Jñana Yoga, Bhakti Yoga, Upasana, Karma Yoga, Dhyana, Mandala, Yantra, Mantra Marg, Mudra, Sadhyavandanam, Ashwamedha, Jyotisha, Ayurveda
Every religious sect sect will have their own tradition, each family, and each individual will also have variations. Some traditions will follow similar scriptures, some will be different, some overlap and some differences, some scriptures will be Telugu Mahabharata, others will be Sanskritic scriptures, Sri Vaishnavas will have tamil and sanskrit, Gaudiyas will have bengali and sanskrit. A lot of diversity in Indian religions.
Sankhya, Yog, Mimansha, Nayaya , Vaisashika are astik (vedic), means they have a formal logic openly declared as their defining logics (called KulSutra). Like Sankhya have SankhyaSutra. Sankhya Karika is not a sutra, but a Karika (manual)
People wrongly say today that astik = theist & nastik = atheist. Really astik means rational (mostly atheists ) and nastik are those who care not for logic or reason evidence proof and defending in free open debate.
BTW i am sankhya, and i consider post islamic vedanta as nastik.
And Ved is not just books or compendium of knowledge, but a concept, ved = reveal (the truth). Veda the book is what has already been revealed.
Ved = a process of revealing all truths to gain *vid* (knowledge ), incrementally by sense, meditation and recording conclusions for others to read, challenge, refute or build upon.
isn't buddhism which is nastika heavily influenced by sankhya.
plasticpinoccio yes you are very right. Then so are most other astik and nastik philosophies of india.
So you need to know what the definitions of astik and nastik are. Buddhism takes two major principles from Sankhya but not the final third (ved = to reveal, scientific doscovery) . Any kul that accepts all three principles (AHINSA, DHARMA, VED) is astik. Anyone missing males it nastik.
Astik means "of faith" or confident in their logic. In vedic tradition, astik will be open to formal debate and throw their philosophy / ideas open to challenge in open debate especially from munis/students of other kul.
Nastik are not open to debate, and they also may not even offer any logics for ideas, opinions etc.
Buddha did never offer logic, evidence for his reincarnation theory and mokhsa theory. Buddha did this on purpose, as he made buddhism for spreading 1st two principles of Ahimsa and Dharma (prevalent in ashrams of vedic huls and some pali/cities of the time) to the people outside, non Sanskrit speakers. That is why many Buddhists texts are in Pali language, even as Siddhartha Gautama was well versed in Sanskrit.
You are very right, and something very few know today. But Siddharta took 2 of core principles from Sankya kulsutra [Ahimsa=nonviolent pluralism ] and [Dharma= rational rules of society to maximize peace, happiness and progress] but not [Ved= scientific discovery and accumulation of knowledge].
All three are must for being astik (faith open to formal debate., only then is it formal philosophy=astik ) .
And Buddha never offered formal explanation for moksha and rebirth theory, never defended in recorded formal debate. And why he never focused of ved (scientific discovery) but still wanted buddhist to learn knowledge ie what was already discovered (gave incentive of moksha) , is also easily guessed.
For if you know Sankhya, they never want you to do discovery (ved) before you have understood and disciplined in AHINSA (nonviolence pluralism autonomy of thought) and Dharma( rational rules of society, why how which laws make society most peaceful happy and progressive . As knowledge os power, and you mist have ahinsa and dharma before power/knowledge.
Hindu religious philosophy is NOT Indian religious philosophy. Hindu religion at one time extended from Persia to Philippines.
yes it is, watch dr nagaswmmy lectures...ones needs to be very well versed in this high philosophy toknow that it is indian
@meatcannon
i wouldn't say Hinduism was "made" by India and there is evidence the original teachings come from Kashmir/Pakistan but it doesn't matter the point is Hinduism is Discovered not made.
lol pakistan
Yes in Pakistan, actually Rawalpindi. The Taliban actually teach Hinduism there. The first verse of the Rg Veda says it was written by the great sage Imran khan.
A scientist makes a hypothesis and then looks for evidence to back or refute his claim
If there was a creator God who loved and cared about us. The evidence would be as follows:
1 Everybody would know of him and his commands and expectations. Multiple prophets all telling exactly the same story.
2 We would be emotionally mature. No petty arguments or wars.
3 We would have been designed better, no backache, baldness or cancer.
4 The earth would not have a cooling crust that is susceptible to volcanos, tsunamis, and earthquakes.
5 Bacteria and viruses would not exist or we would be immune.
6 The world would be designed in a way that we all flourished. Some people throw food away and have water on tap, some people experience famine and drought.
7 Adults would not believe or tell children ridiculous stories about talking snakes or flying horses, told as literal truths on pain of rejection if you did not believe.
I could go on. There is no evidence for God or Gods.
You fail to understand the nature of the cosmos. It comes balancing forces. Even if all those things you said were true, it doesn't prove God exists. There are several philosophical, metaphysical and most importantly, EMPIRICAL evidences for the existence of God. I was an active atheist too but through a decade of philosophical and spiritual study I came to realize that I was giving arguments against bogus arguments of religious fanatics, and that never really proved anything. The concept of God is not meant to be the question of whether God exists or not. It's the concept that every petal in this universe is whispering in our ears that there exists an unknown force at work. By acknowledging and humbling ourselves before this divine force, we gain knowledge of God. Not by sitting in this tiny planet in the universe and assuming that only the things that we puny humans can prove right, are the only things that exist. According to your logic, if God existed, he wouldn't make you so ignorant either. But that's not the case. You were intentionally made ignorant, so that you could mature as a seeker. Not close your mind like a doubter.
Gokul Ramesh So, I was intentionally made ignorant. I assume you are talking about mankind in general.
So, I was made and did not evolve! I should close my mind to all the evidence that we evolved. I should open my mind to the possibility of the supernatural, even although there is no evidence.
I think that the supernatural is mans inability to accept his own mortality. The fuel for every religion and con artist that ever existed.
I wondered if you could share the empirical evidence you have for God. If this is empirical irrefutable evidence for your God, that would be great. If you can do this:
1 All religions would have to convert
2 All atheists and agnostics would have to admit they were wrong.
3 You would become famous overnight
I suspect all you have is faith, this is not evidence. It is wish thinking, nothing more nothing less.
@@differdog9354 There is no "intention".
There are just suitable conditions for life. The consciousness (forces/laws of universe) when meets these conditions, life occurs. We evolved from non living to living, and as a human u are already equipped to understand.
No one was made intentionally intelligent or ignorant, it is on that particular life form if it can figure out!!