Advaita Debate: Brain vs Brahman 

Highlight of the video : The brain is a part of my body and it did not go anywhere.

I would be glad to pay for the discussion with Swami Sarvapriyanda.

A tree could be considered a conscious being without a brain.

Class 12 NCERT BIOLOGY CH-1: CONSCIOUSNESS: The ability of living beings to respond to external activities outside the body(stimuli).

Ah Vipuls word salad damaged my brain, consciousness, and mind. I disagree with Vimoh, the caller may actually not have been conscious during the call.

I agree with vimoh that advaita is just a thought. But he is wrong in telling we are unconscious when we go to sleep, no neuroscientist would say so. And by consciousness is not meant what he thinks is meant. If it was so simple we wouldn't be having so much discussion around the topic. Again i am not here to teach, but both vimoh and the person talking are ignorant about both advaita and neuroscience. Such topics are highly technical and i think i have problem with dumbing things down.

When you go to sleep you are in subconcious state because your brain is still working and you are actively breathing. There are many levels of consiousness.

Ye caller sahab ne consciousness or philosophy ka definitive kis dictionary se pdha tha?

Concciousness is a result of several activities of neural system and it can't be actually defined keeping a single factor/frame in mind. We are talking about processing sound, light and emotions simultaneously! So, its not that simple....

Make more of such videos vimoh

We can observe our physical reality like we can observe our hands ,legs etc. the same as we can also observe our emotions like anger, sadness, happiness. So what is observing all those physical as well as mental conditions..? In Advaita vedanta it says brahman is "nirguna" but it doesn't mean that it has no "gunas" it means its static. Can anyone say that they observed their consciousness while they are in deep dreamless sleep..? Is that means it wasn't their...? Its still there but your are not able to observe because you are in deep sleep and when you wake up, with the help of mind you can say that there's consciousness. So death doesn't mean that our consciousness is also died rather there is no element to understand it. And afterall it can only understand by having a lot more time spending with thyself otherwise you will always stay in the agnostic side even if you read all advaita vedantic scriptures. Theoretical evidence has nothing to do with spirituality.

I think this is not an real debate the Debate partner cannot have real knowledge or conceptual knowledge about Advaita vedanta so I belive that you want some knowledgeable person to debate with him. Bro I thought if you want real discussion about the Advaita vedanta so please meet Aacharya Prashant Advaita Foundation they are very intellectual to get real debate and clear understanding of concepts of Advaita vedanta and Acharya ji really wants and appreciate like your type of people who asks Questions there's RU-vid channel is :- Acharya Prashant debate with him. Or Expose them😅.

Speaking on a biological view consciousness is a response and stimuli based thing which is more complicated technically..... It's not a physical thing and cannot be detected by any instrument the thing we can detect are the causes of consciousness we have till observed physically...and it can't be understood by science because science is study analysis and research on physical world Something which is not physical how it could be understood on the basic pillars of science And irony is that consciousness itself cannot be denied So basically Study neuroscience, psychology And philosophy at least we will get an idea further logic goes.... And this also cannot be denied that it goes beyond the human logic goes... Vimoh let me know your view please

confused guy... want to become cool.. but ends up being Dumb..!!

If Consciousness was tank and brain was tap, consciousness could use another tap to pour out off instead of just shutting off.

2:32 Advaita Vedanta "says" that mind is a reflection/aspect/manifestation of the consciousness. And the reason why consciousness is incomphrensible is because it is the consciousness that is trying to understand itself. You can only experience consciousness, you can "be" conscious, someone can "say" that you're conscious because your consciousness is manifesting itself in different forms or ways - whether through material or non-material medium i.e. body or mind, is a different debate altogether.

His knowledge of advaita vedanta is extremely shallow. Consciousness points to outer object-you are talking about something, so that something is the object to which the consciousness is pointing, so it does not know itself-fragmented consciousness. But when consciousness acknowledges itself, which is a very difficult thing to achieve while having the mind(thoughts, memory, experiences etc) active. You may say I acknowledge my consciousness but that acknowledgement too is a thought only. That which observes is not the mind. Vedanta defines mind as that which has memory, experience, etc. So awareness is a new thing here, beyond mind. Nothing should be denied so easily unless you can reverse engineer the idea of the " one " who has written the text, and not the text. First 3-4 pages itself of Kena Upanishads will will make you realize you do not knkw anything. And whatsoever you are saying, vedanta is too clever and already has subjected those things and you talking this, so you are speaking nothing new, and you are inside the box, not outside and therefore your approach is not holistic n unified. Vedanta not naturally but intentionally says you cannot understand "that" by using ordinary senses or mental faculties, since it is itself the perceiver. You cannot bite your own teeth, a duality is necessary. But when your consciousness acknowledges itself, it is non-duality. If different people experience that, all experience would be the same. You can experience it in deep meditation where mind(thoughts) are been able to kept aside amd off but consciousness remains. This state is of pure awareness, and only and only such a state is of pure awareness. And when it says about "brahman", . The assumption in the video is that brain, mind, consciousness, thoughts and observation are all one, since your idea is general. But vedanta is a highly particular and objetive thing, of the subtle. "Objective about the subtle".

1) "Vimoh:- We don't know of any examples of Consciousness existing without the mind" is like saying "We don't know any example of electromagnetic field without the electrons" The Electromagnetic field exists, and is all pervading, without the electrons. So your conclusion that conscious has to exist only if minds exist is false. 2) How do we know the brain generates Consciousness? "Vimoh:- Because when the brain stops working there is no consciousness" This is like saying when the compass breaks there is no magnetic field anymore. dude, when the compass breaks it stops detecting the field. Same maybe extended theoretically for Consciousness. When the brain stops functioning it stops capturing the field of consciousness. 3) "Vimoh:- We know that water is there but we don't know that about Consciousness" This is like saying "We don't know that about the Electromagnetic field" How do we know if the electromagnet if field exists? when it manifests itself only though light or its interaction with the charged particles. We only see light or the charged particles, we never see the field directly. So if you accept that, you may as well entertain Consciousness as a field. 4) "Vimoh:- There is no reason to think the consciousness has simply been cut off" Yes because if it is a field, it is not cut off, only that the ability of brain to capture the field is no longer there. 5) Vimoh:- It is all we know there is no reason to think that we know more than that. - However, science or any investigation works at the boundary of known and unknown, and i will give you a reason to think differently. I agree that we don't know more than that. But we also don't know more than charged particles and light. And YET WE BELIEVE IN THE ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD. VIMOH has not studied science and it shows. 6) "Vimoh:-Except speculation perhaps": - exactly this is where science thrives. Possibility of something might be true ,is where some space for scientific investigation using theoretical modelling and further testing. 7) "Vimoh:- Consciousness is inextricably linked to brain", is saying that a detector is inextricably linked with the field or particles. or like saying a compass in inextricably linked with magnetic field. dude the compass does not generate the magnetic field it exists outside the compass and despite the compass. "Vimoh:- when the brain goes , consciousness does not come back ", is like saying when the compass needle breaks magnetic field does not come back. 8)"Vimoh:- So logically it seems like Consciousness is more dependent on the brain than brain on consciousness," This is like saying, magnetic field is dependent on the compass than compass on the magnetic field. 9) Vipan- ask the person who is unconscious if he/she is unconscious. is like saying ask a dead man if he is dead. 10) Vimoh:- There will be some activity in your brain if you are asleep:- totally true no issues here. 11) "Vimoh:-I am Conscientiously limiting myself to what we know: ";"We" as in all humanity ?. how boastful to think vimoh "knows" everything "we" know. Of course VImoh is limiting himself, using his ignorance towards another possibility. That is also okay. As long as he doesn't make an jump from there to considering it reality. 12) "Vimoh:-Brain is at least what consciousness is contingent upon"- is like saying compass is at least magnetic field is contingent upon 13) "Vimoh"-We have no evidence of consciousness existing in things that don't have brain" AMZING POINT! THIS ISLIKE SAYING WE HAVE NO EVIDENCE OF MAGNETIC FIELD EXISTING IN THINGS THAT DONT HAVE A COMPASS NEEDLE. 14) MAYBE THIS IS WHERE WE STOP RIGHT? TELL THAT TO MICHAEL FARADAY

It was a good debate, but I still feel consciousness is something different from just physical bodily matter (brain, heart and body). Cause you can put all the physical stuff together but it won't come to life despite having everything necessary to be a functional human being. so where does life in things (bodily matter) come from? Edit: I also believe that there should be room for exploration as many scientific discoveries began from philosophies and wrong hypothesis.

No consciousness and sub-consciousness creats by the mind. Consciousness is imaginary and sub-consciousness is reality.

Agree 110% with you man. Religions, adveita, spiritual teachings are ALL speculations. I doubt all this bs. I only trust my EXPERIENCE. I'm glad to see someone doing pushback to these people who talk about things for which they have ZERO EVIDENCE. Thanks for what you do

sote time hum unconscious nhi sub conscious hote h vimoh.

Vimoh, *Consciousness* is the ability to experience. And only the person experiencing can tell for sure if they are conscious or not. When they are awake they can tell it. When they are asleep they can't. But after waking up, they can tell that I had a nightmare, or my shoulder was hurting the entire night, or I slept like a baby(peacefully). That means they were having an experience. Even in sleep consciousness is there.

What I think is consciousness truly depends upon the mind or brain. Without brains it doesn't exist, but there are chores we usually do on a daily basis unconsciously for an example why I support this political party or why do I believe in these religious Dogmas. Is it something just an implant by society or is it my choice to really know about a particular subject. To understand these unconscious states of mind advait came with a solution don't just believe anything ask and get to the root of it.

Arey yrr call the real man ap and debate ,, who is fake chirkut

If brain is machine then consciousness is computation.

Apko Hindi me baat karna chahiye connectivity achiye

Bahot panchat

Pls u everytime come in hindi ..pls ...india understand u more ..bcos I like u people ...to whom india listen more

Vimoh tum Sach he

Lol such a nice title 😅😂

We should stop talking about consciousness because it starts an unnecessary debate about mind, brain and awareness that has nothing to do with non-duality and it leads to nowhere. Rather, we should talk about Presence/Existence. Because it's only Pure Presence/Existence/Being which is ultimately real. And that's what "brahman" refers to.

I think both Vimoh and the person lack substantial amount of knowledge and it gonna be very difficult for any atheist and agnostics to refute the claims of Advaita... and ultimately I have seen the answers boils down to "could be, might be, may be, we don't know, you may beliveve that, its a 50-50" ....

Vimoh could you tell us what is your qualification ??

Other fellow does look comfortable in english and hence not able to explain his POV. Better to discuss in hindi

Plz make a video on hyper quest

Brahman is the mind of minds, name of names, form of forms, the Absolute and it can only be witnessed as it is the 'I'. ( 'I' is 'THAT' which is formless and accessible for consciousness to witness). It cannot be experienced, nor sensed and certainly cannot be talked about directly. The existence of the indescribable 'I'(which is the mind of minds, form of forms, name of names) for interaction to take place is the proof of Brahman, and certainly one cannot prove to 'I' that 'I' exists. If one doesn't believe in Brahman, linguistically he can only be asked, 'What is sense of all senses? Name of all names?'. Language will fail at this point and the speaker will have to go beyond it to witness it. All people experience the 'I' when they sleep when they go past their dreams and beyond. Now can one wake up and witness the 'beyond dreams and rest state' while remaining in the interaction is where Advaita Vedanta makes people suffer and people start getting all sorts of ideas about enlightenment.

I think Brahman should do a Turing test of Atman , if it passes then Advaita is true 😂

Body ek medium hai ya materialistic koi bhi chiz ek medium hai,off course without medium there's nothing

Dreaming while sleeping is the activity in subconscious mind.

Consciousness is usually identified with mind, but mental consciousness is only the human range which no more exhausts all the possible ranges of consciousness than human sight exhausts all the gradations of colour or human hearing all the gradations of sound - for there is much above or below that is to man invisible and inaudible. So there are ranges of consciousness above and below the human range, with which the normal human [consciousness] has no contact and they seem to it unconscious... - Sri Aurobindo

there's only 1 mind, who is the nonstop dreamer of all persons, in whose dream all brains appear. in seemingly deep sleep of person brain do not appear. when the dream seemingly wakes you, person, brain and body appears, and yes u can make a brain surgery in dream. it's all dream. all persons that sees dreaming person are also dreamt so we can't trust their testimonials. that's what advita says. it's a matter of belief. i can neither prove it nor experienced it

I have gone through almost all of your videos and I m assuming that you are more agnostic than atheist. Isn't it ? If not plz make a video about the differences between an agnostic and an atheist ?

Firstly human is self conscious which makes humans different from other animals. When a patient in coma he lost his self consciousness

When we dont know about comsiousness then every definition is a limitation.

How do you know brain doesn't go 😂😂

I think J.krishnamurti explained it very well.

Just go through some totally proven NDE experiences recorded by doctors n experienced by neuroscientist whose brain stopped working...yet could absolutely remember their astral experience wch had similarities wth many more such experiences

The relationship between consciousness and the brain raises philosophical questions about the nature of reality, the self, and free will. However, Vimohs agnostic position, while focusing on whats measurable, avoids these crucial questions. While I appreciate your emphasis on empirical evidence, I find this approach a bit problematic because it overlooks the philosophical implications of consciousness itself. Limiting the debate to an objective model of reality seems insufficient when dealing with such a subjective and nuanced phenomenon. Nonetheless, I admire your engagement in these discussions. Please keep exploring! Lots of love from Lucknow

I think he is confusing between consciousness and sub consciousness, why r you toying with him Vimoh? 😊

Vimoh is correct.. His statement about the brain and consciousness comparison is untrue. Because, in research we've a saying, correlation doesn't mean causality. If the brain goes, the cons. also goes cannot tell us that brain causes cons.. But yes we've other ways to know that vimoh is correct.

Sir please hold some live debates as well. Your biggest fan, lots of love

Wow! The person who came in to talk about advaita is needs to do some more home work. Calling advaita not a proper philosophy would give any lecturer a heart attack.

Hello vimov, I've seen some discussions you had with muslims. all of them were but with laymen. I am writing this because i think you haven't looked into islam and I've seen you reiterate same arguments that muslim duaats have dealt with in the past, so you may get some helps from them. If you want to debate or discuss with scholars you can have one with any of the duaats(muslim scholars who preach to non-muslims), there are many for example Muhammad hijab or dawah wise or zeeshan from smiletojannah etc etc. And there are many of them who speak Hindustani as well like Mufti yasir nadeem al-wajidi, or if you want to debate evolution then you have qaiser ahmed raja. There are many, I've just named a few.

Sweet Vimoh! You're def not "failing to understand the question".

But consciousness arising from where ? Jad aur chetan ek hi hai

These are new age bhakts. So called 'acharya' PRASHANT bhakts. These are PHAKTS.

Basic scientific mindset

Also I honestly don't think an atheist needs to disagree with Advaita(just to make a point that he/she rejects everything), which is a philosophy and not a religion...advaita discuss fundamental nature of reality and ways to transcend ... I would not denigrate it by calling it a religious concept and it may not be for everybody

The case of the railroad worker in the 1900's clearly shows that a damaged brain changes the person. His family and friends didn't even recognise him. Consciousness of a human being could be said as the combination of all the neurons working together seemlessly. Brain surgery is sometimes conducted while keeping the patient awake and asking them to recite alphabetsto make sure the doctors do not make any mistake.

Is everything is energy? Do brain stay concious by neural signal's or energy. We can say that it's concious is dependent on energy? We can say universe is concious cause lots of activities happens from atomic to galactic levels. Do we have narrow idea of consciousness? Cause matter and energy is one and human body is form of energy. Energy is conscious then can we understand it with pitty brain singles?

Bramha is infinite energy we are so pitty in from of him. You cannot achieve him with arrogancy and egoistic way. You need to be humble and taje shelter to him through SadGuru's

9:30 what vimoh said 😂

❤❤❤❤❤❤

👌

What a topic to discuss

Do we consider nervou system and brain as one or they are two different parts connected to each other?

Modern Upanishads ❤😊

3:24 But we know of consciousness existing with less of mind, brilliant guy gets in an accident.. I think you can imagine the rest. From this we can conclude at least that consciousness is not the part of the mind or brain lost in the accident. 7:40 I think what the man is trying to say is that whether you can be sure that consciousness is absent when you sleep? Sleep could be a state of brain experienced by consciousness as unconsciousness. Like if you look at monitor while the computer is put to sleep you won't see anything, I believe that doesn't mean you don't exist right? It just means the computer is not broadcasting anything to the monitor, speaker etc.. Also this state of the brain is not recording apparently, so you could be conscious and not remember it when you wake up. That also doesn't mean you were unconscious 11:00 The people who invented the word unconscious where not neuroscientists or people who knew anything with any depth about the world or the human body. So it doesn't matter what their definition of the word was. As unconscious may not mean a lack of consciousness but a lack of memory of conscious experience. Deep sleep and dream sleep are two fields of conscious experience in Vedanta. 16:47 Bacteria and viruses don't have brains. They have consciousness. That is they move towards the things they want and avoid things they don't. They sense their environment to make decisions. Looks like consciousness to me from the evidence we have after observing conscious phenomenon.

I don't think we should use word belief when it comes to advaita .. one can either realize it or forget about it .. If one finds some other experiences one can document it ,.. analysing advaita by reason alone is also a folly as it talks of understanding things that are beyond mind and also senses...so I think without proper authority and scholarship on subject discussing it with each other proves nothing , when both sides agree on outset that their understanding is basic .. I think this discussion should be with some advaita practitioner like Swami Sarvapriyananda