YouTube Transcript:
Verse 76 - Reply 4 - Soul is not absolutely unbound | Atmasiddhi Shastra Jnan Yajna

Skip watching entire videos - get the full transcript, search for keywords, and copy with one click.

AutoDub

Understand YouTube Foreign Videos

Immersive YouTube Voice Translation

Break language barriers, embrace global quality content

Solve Foreign Video Barriers Instantly

Video Transcript

Video Summary

Summary

Core Theme

The text explores the philosophical concept of the soul's agency in karma, differentiating between its inherent nature and its current state to resolve the paradox of its perceived bondage and liberation.

Mind Map

Click to expand

Click to explore the full interactive mind map • Zoom, pan, and navigate

Regarding the Third Fundamental Truth of the soul,

being - the soul is the doer of karmas,

disciple has been thinking about it.

So, there are two options, either the soul is a doer or the soul is a non-doer;

two options.

I'm talking about the disciple's thought process right now.

If the soul is the doer of karmas,

meaning, if it acquires karmas, which bind the soul

and puts the soul in bondage - bandhanma,

then it might be its nature.

So, it cannot be destroyed, removed, given away;

this will continue forever.

So, if we accept the first option, there is nothing like liberation, because

it is a nature of the soul to acquire, accumulate karmas and be in bondage.

If you take the second option - the soul is not the doer,

then we have four options.

Who is the doer?

When you say... Because karma is evident.

So if it's... if the soul is not the doer, someone has to be the doer.

So till you don't give these options,

you cannot even conclude that the soul is non-doer.

So four options:

1. The karmas binds the karmas.

So the past karmas

inspire the new karmas and they get bound.

2. Automatically, without any reason, you don't even need the past karmas.

The new karmas just come;

I said bang, and get bound, for no reason.

You don't even need the reason of past karmas.

Not the soul's effort, not the past karmas; nothing, for no reason - automatically.

So, that was the second option.

3. Prakriti - matter does everything, and it seems

that the purush or the soul, is getting bound, is the doer, but actually,

it is the prakriti who is doing, and the soul is unbound, unattached, non-doer.

That was the third option.

4. God's inspiration - because inspiration is needed for karmas.

So, if not the matter, because matter cannot inspire,

soul does not inspire because the soul is unbound according to the disciple,

so we will need a third agency which inspires.

So he says, then everything is by God's inspiration.

So, God's responsible for everything and the soul is non-doer, unbound,

so no reason to think of liberation because it's not in bondage,

it's always dependent on the compelling inspiration of God.

So one, the soul is the doer, but then it becomes the nature

and the soul is non-doer, then these four options.

So we saw this, how the Guru resolves this, and one and two - three things we saw.

So quickly, I'll be asking how the Guru resolved this

and you will be giving me the words of the verses, by which this doubt gets eliminated.

Karma j karta karma - karmas do karma (doer), how is this eliminated?

By which words, of verse 74?

Hoy na chetan prerna. So, mundane matter cannot inspire,

it needs the inspiration of the soul -

'hoy na chetan prerna' solves it.

Then the second option, karmas automatically get bound - how is this solved?

Jo chetan kartu nathi, because if there is no soul's inspiration,

karmas cannot get bound, it can move...

karma meaning karmic particles, but for practical purposes, I am using karma.

Karmas can move in the atmosphere, but not get bound and show impact on the soul.

It can touch the soul, but it won't get bound,

or it gets bound only by soul's inspiration.

Correct?

So hoy na...

Jo chetan kartu nathi is the answer.

It is not the nature of the soul.

It may be a tendency, it may be its capacity to do, so it is doing - doer.

But it is not the nature of the soul - which words?

Again, the same thing - jo chetan kartu nathi.

So, first of all, soul is doing and 'jo' means if,

if it indulges in likes and dislikes.

If it is in an equanimous state,

then no karmas occur, the karmas just touch the soul and go away.

But if there is likes and dislikes, in the form of...

inspiration in the form of likes and dislikes, feelings, impure feelings,

then the karmas, which were just passing, get bound!

Clear?

So, now we have another two alternatives, options, queries to solve.

Two arguments that the disciple had put forth in verse 71

about the soul not being the doer of karmas. So actually there were three arguments,

but for the non-doer, there were only two.

One was about the nature of the soul. So there, the soul is the doer.

So, two arguments that the disciple had put forth in verse 71

about the soul not being the doer of karmas

were resolved perfectly by the Guru in verse 74 and 75.

Now the solution of the two options presented in verse 72, what was it?

Atma sada asang - soul is always unattached,

karey prakriti bandh - matter itself creates bondage ; that Sankhya philosophy;

Athva Ishwar prerna - or God's inspiration,

that was by the influence of the Nyay philosophy.

So now the solution of the two options presented in verse 72

of the doctrine of doership of prakriti and the doctrine of doership of God;

either prakriti - matter is the doer, or God is the doer, these were the two...

will be given in verse 76 and 77. In verse 76, the first one, which I'll be doing now,

will be negating or explaining the doctrine of the doership of prakriti.

And the next one will be explaining the doctrine of the doership of God.

Clear?

Influenced by the Sankhya philosophy, the disciple said that the soul is non-attached,

unbound, pure, pristine,

and prakriti binds karma.

So prakriti is responsible for the bondage.

And this is by the influence of which philosophy?

Sankhya philosophy. The disciple projected the doership of karma on

prakriti; not on the soul meaning the purush, but on prakriti.

So, how does the Guru resolve this?

Explaining the flaw in the disciple's reasoning

and bringing about the right conviction, the Guru says -

Keval - absolutely.

hota asang jo - if the soul is absolutely non-attached.

Keval - absolutely,

Asang - non-attached.

Keval hota asang jo - if the soul, if 'hota jo'

means if the soul was absolutely non-attached and pure and free.

Pure, free is not over here, but

when He says asang, He means pure, free, unbound.

Bhasat - experience,

taney na kem - then why is it not experienced by you right now?

It is pure, right?

There is no association of karmas, right?

So, you should be experiencing your soul.

Why is it not experienced by you?

Asang chhe. Oh, I thought the Guru was negating this, but He is accepting it!

Asang chhe parmarthathi -

soul is non-attached, but from the higher viewpoint, the absolute viewpoint,

the real viewpoint - the nishchay viewpoint; whichever word you are comfortable with.

Pan nijbhane tem - but this can be attained when one experiences its pure Self.

In one line He skips from the inherent nature to the pure state.

So if you don't know the difference between nature and the state, you'd be confused.

You'd be lost in this verse.

So short meaning: If the soul is absolutely, completely, only

non-attached and pure, without the association of karma,

then, why is it not experienced by you?

You should have been able to experience it right from the beginning itself.

Beginning itself means? At birth.

Before the First Fundamental Truth started,

because then you wouldn't have any doubt of the existence of the soul.

If you are experiencing the soul, you wouldn't be doubting from beginning itself,

not during the Third Fundamental Truth.

Because the soul is pure, there is no deluding karma,

there is no knowledge obscuring karma, nothing is there.

That's what the disciple is saying - it's unbound, unattached, free, pure;

then you should have been... bhasat taney - experienced by you.

You would have been experiencing it since the beginning.

You would be experiencing right now, listening to me also.

And...

you wouldn't even have the doubt of the First Fundamental

regarding the existence of the soul, because you have an experiential evidence.

You didn't have, so the doubt.

The doubt was cleared, still you said the existence of the soul seems a possibility -

because I yet don't have the experience.

But if it was pure, you would be experiencing it already,

not during Self-realisation or Omniscience.

You would be experiencing...

Because then there would be nothing like stages of spiritual development only -

first to fourteen.

It is pure in the first also, it's pure in the fourth,

it is pure in the 14th, in the state of liberation; everywhere;

so, you wouldn't need so many stages of development.

You understand?

So again, if the soul is absolutely non-attached and pure;

meaning, without the association of karma, then why is it not experienced by you?

You should have been able to experience it right from the beginning itself.

It is non-attached, but from the absolute viewpoint.

From the relative viewpoint, it becomes absolutely non-attached, say, liberated,

only when it experiences the true Self,

abides in it, and gets rid of all the karmic bondages.

When he experiences his Self - the fourth stage of spiritual development.

He abides - atmasthirta - abidance in the Self;

that was atmajnan - experiencing.

And then the awareness, the

abidance in the Self means, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth etc.

And then you get rid of the bondages and when you get rid of the last particle -

the state where this no contact with a single particle.

Maulikji had explained in Apurva Avsar; the last particle you get rid of

and you are in complete liberated state.

Liberated state - siddhahood, accomplished, absolutely liberated.

So, its nature - the nature of the soul is completely unattached right now,

but the state of the soul will be absolutely unattached, when he abides in the soul,

when he experiences his soul, when he abides in his soul,

and when he gets rid of all the karmic bondages.

So beautifully explained.

In order to explain the concept of the soul,

the Guru clarifies here...

You must know two things - the inherent nature of the soul

and its current state.

Two things you should be knowing, then you would know,

you would understand the concept of soul.

See the beautiful word used in the first verse of Shri Atmasiddhi Shastra,

'Je swaroop samjya vina' - without understanding the swaroop of the Self.

Swaroop means both -

the nature, the eternal nature, which was there, is, and will always be;

the nature of the soul, and,

and the different

states which modify, and finally becomes a pure state.

So, both the things.

Swaroop

means its swabhav - inherent nature, and its capacity to modify, states; so both.

So He didn't use 'Je swabhav samjya vina'.

When you know the nature of the soul, the inherent nature only...

You need to know the whole constitution.

What is its nature?

What is its capacities?

How does it modify? What is its current state?

What state it can achieve; everything.

When you know everything...

So in 'je swaroop' I think all the Six Fundamental Truths come.

Only in these two words - 'je swaroop'; 'je' being, it can be for both

matter and consciousness, but here we are interested in consciousness

so 'je' would mean the soul.

So two things - 1. Inherent nature,

which maybe we have not perceived; read, heard, but not perceived.

But it is perceived by the Enlightened Ones!

And They say the inherent nature of the soul is eternal,

endless,

pure,

beyond the manifold varieties of earthly expressions -

humans, animals, celestial beings, hellish beings, angry people, peaceful people;

beyond the manifold varieties of earthly expressions and experiences.

So this is the inherent nature, which is perceived by the Enlightened Ones.

And 2. The present state, the current state,

which is filled with frailties and flaws,

meaning

weaknesses

and defects, or say impurities,

and in this state, it is the doer of karmas.

So whenever bondage occurs, it is by the soul's inspiration,

which is - the soul's capacity to do it, rather it has become a tendency to do it,

but it is not its inherent nature.

You can boil the water and make it hot

but what is the nature of water?

If you don't do anything, it will become cool.

If you do something, means boil it, you will see the state - hot;

changing into cold or hotter, anything.

It can be more impure also, it can turn towards purity,

but what is the inherent nature of the soul?

Shitalta - coolness.

So the Guru clarifies all this in these two lines, and so beautifully!

Keval hota asang - if the soul is absolutely non-attached.

So while presenting his case

of the doership of the soul,

the disciple had described the soul as

pure and unattached; which words?

Atma sada asang ne. We don't want who is the. ..

we don't want to know anything about prakriti - matter, right now.

We don't want to know anything about prakriti, and its doership and its functions

and its capacities; we don't want to know anything.

We just want to know about the purush or the soul. So what had he said?

Atma sada; so atma means soul, sada - always, completely, absolutely.

Asang - unattached, non-attached.

No association with body or karmas, and here we need karma, so forget the body.

No association! That's what the disciple had argued - that soul is always non-attached.

And this is because the Sankhya philosophy believes in the soul as absolutely pure,

unbound, non-attached.

The Vedanta philosophy calling soul as Brahma

and believes that Brahma is completely or say absolutely pure,

and unbound, non-attached.

So because of the influence of Sankhya, Vedanta etc., he starts arguing or presenting

his thought processes

by saying that, "everyone is saying"; everyone means these two, okay?

"Everyone is saying the soul is pure, the soul is pure".

This is what the disciple had presented;

when he was presenting his case, he had said this, he had argued it.

And the Guru says, "Of course!".

So, one more trait we learn; how do we... how should we communicate.

How should we be when there is a dispute or disagreement -

first, accept the right thing, then explain the wrong thing.

First, accept the right.

He's saying, "Of course the soul is pure!"

So first response is of acceptance;

not explanation also, not negation also.

Acceptance; anekantvada - doctrine of multiplicity of viewpoints, says

it should be with ahimsa - in a non-violent manner

So first, you should know the viewpoint and accept it,

then you are practising ahimsa;

then explain the other viewpoint and practise anekant- multiplicity of viewpoints.

First practise ahimsa!

Don't start with, "I disagree with you".

First say where you agree with him.

I've uncovered something completely different from this verse,

there is nothing like...

but I learned this from this verse.

First ahimsa, then anekant.

So first say, "Correct, the soul is pure", but in His mind, He says,

"Yes, his nature is pure; its current state is not pure; it is impure".

Do you all agree? Impurity, have you experienced impurity?

Or are you experiencing impurity right now?

'I'm not understanding this confusing thing' - that itself is an impurity.

It's ignorance, what else? That is also impurity.

Correct?

Then suddenly you get a thought that if He explains this way, He's going to take

at least till 12:30.

So another impure feeling; so all this impure feeling - what is it?

Your soul is unbound.

It's non-attached, not influenced by karmas or situations or person or anything;

The soul is peaceful, pure and powerful.

So where is that powerful soul who should not get influenced?

Where is that peaceful soul who should not get all these thoughts?

Where is that pure soul who feels, 'what is the need of knowing all this?'

You understand?

So in His mind, He knows that when I'm agreeing, I'm agreeing

to the inherent nature of the soul.

And then say, but I disagree,

if you are speaking that the state of the soul is pure right now, in the present.

Because I'm experiencing, I cannot say this is maya - illusion.

This impurity is also what I am experiencing.

Mithya - false, in the sense it's not my nature, correct!

But if you say that this state is also mithya, then you are mithya.

You're talking mithya.

You're talking mrusha - lying. Mrushavada - speaking - vada, mrusha - lying, wrong.

But your attitude should be such - first accept.

So the first... the Guru accepts,

you said, 'the soul is always unattached,' and I agree.

It is always pure in its nature.

Always pure. 'Sada - always' you said - I agree.

But the moment you use the word keval -

it is only pure, absolutely pure, completely pure, I negate.

And then He gives why. He explains - then why is it not experienced by you?

Keval hota asang jo - if the soul is absolutely non-attached. Sada asang, I agree,

Sada asang - I agree, because the nature remains always, so sada asang;

but if you are saying: that's the concept of the soul, that's the definition of the soul -

that the soul is always pure.

So keval if you use, only that one word, keval - absolutely;

not differentiating between the nature, the eternal nature, and the current state.

If you don't differentiate and you say, 'That's it, it's only pure!',

how do you account of this anger and lust, and what do you say about that?

These impure feelings emerge from the soul.

So those who want to keep the soul only pure, will say all this is of mind and intellect.

But then you'll have to prove that...

Mind and intellect are non-living,

and if they are non-living, how can they have feelings?

You are seeing the contradiction?

You can consider them non-living, but then you can't keep the feelings there.

If you keep it in the living, you cannot say absolutely pure.

You understand?

If you want to put it here,

you cannot say soul is 'always' in the sense of 'only'; you cannot say this!

If you want to say - soul is different and the body, mind, intellect,

everything is different; fine. Then you can't put feelings there.

Because if feelings can arise in the mind and the intellect, and not in the body,

then you are differentiating between two non-living entities.

So one category of non-living matter has no feelings - the body.

One category of non-living matter, which is the mind, intellect - have feelings.

You understand the confusion?

Have I been successful in confusing you?

Have I been successful? This is a wonderful question.

You can't do anything, but just stay like this.

If you say "Yes, you have been successful", means I have confused you, I've not solved.

And if I have solved your problem, then I'm not successful.

So at times you just have to sit like this.

Vivekananda; you should not nod your head for anything.

You understand?

How beautifully,

just by using 'atma sada asang - the soul is always unattached' that I accept,

but now if you say 'absolutely unattached';

absolutely;

means you are not differentiating between the nature and the state

and considering it pure only; always, only, absolutely, completely;

these four words will be asked in the quiz.

1. Only pure, 2. Absolutely pure, 3. Always pure, 4. Completely pure.

I think completely and absolutely are the very apt words.

Because 'always pure' - of course, it's always pure; the nature is always pure.

But 'only' if you say, that purity is the definition of the soul...

So the Guru says, of course you are right,

sada asang - always unattached, but only from a certain perspective.

He is not yet saying nature and state and... all this, I have said.

Param Krupalu Dev has not said.

Param Krupalu Dev has said, only from a certain perspective you are right.

Not completely. See, how beautifully the Guru explains.

If the soul is always, absolutely, completely non-attached,

meaning, without the association of karmas, without the influence of the karmas,

association and influence.

If it's completely without the influence of karmas,

bhasat taney na kem - why is it not experienced by you?

If the soul is absolutely non-attached, then why is it not experienced by you?

Then why are you unable to experience that pure Self now?

Why all this routine of spiritual practices? Sorry, culture.

It is culture, but sometimes we get tired and bored, we say what is all this routine?

Wake up in the morning and perform Devvandan; evening also Devvandan,

bhakti in the morning, bhakti in the evening;

and the same routine of scriptural studies and offering service; same thing.

Why do you need? You are already a pure soul!

Why are you unable to experience it now?

You should be experiencing it from the beginning; beginning means verse 44.

When it was said, soul exists, it is eternal, etc.

And you say, "Of course it's right. I am experiencing it."

There wouldn't be verse 45.

You could go straight to 'Aho! Aho! Shri Sadguru' - thanksgiving only.

So why weren't you experiencing from the beginning?

When you have an experiential evidence, then why did you utter, in verse 45?

Why did you doubt the existence?

Cannot be seen, its form is unknown,

cannot be experienced by any other senses, hence it does not exist.

You already had an experiential evidence.

However,

such a non-attached pure soul is not experienced, and that is the fact.

Right? It's not experienced.

So it is evident that the soul certainly has the association of the veil of karma.

You would say that the veil of karma is such that I can't experience my Self.

I am but I can't experience.

This handkerchief is coming to be of great use.

Is the clock here or not?

Are you able to see it? (No.)

Why?

Why, Dr. Mansi?

It's covered, concealed; there is a veil.

So this veil of karma prevents us from experiencing the pure Self.

So it is evident that there is an association,

rather, influence of the karma on the soul.

Correct?

So all this what I said comes only in the first line;

keval hota... keval - if it is absolutely non-attached and pure,

why is it not experienced by you?

Only those which are bound by karmas are not experiencing,

but you are saying it's unbound,

absolutely unbound. Then you should have experienced it from the beginning, not now!

Then why did you waste my time? First Fundamental and Second Fundamental;

you could have saved so much time, so much money, that we spent in two Yajnas.

Atma chhe, atma nitya chhe - existing and everlastingness of the soul.

You would have experienced.

Therefore it cannot be said that the soul is completely non-attached

or absolutely non-attached

because we are experiencing the veil of say ignorance,

or say karmas, or say passions, whatever!

Correct?

And now what does He say? Asang chhe - soul is non-attached.

The moment that fellow is convinced it's not asang,

the moment he's convinced now, that the soul is not without the association of karmas,

not totally pure, not non-attached;

the moment he is convinced, what does the Guru say? It is non-attached.

It is non-attached - you can put comma. It is non-attached,

and now how do you explain this? Very very simple.

There are two viewpoints - the absolute viewpoint and the relative viewpoint.

I'll take one minute of yours. The two viewpoints:

absolute viewpoint, relative viewpoint.

The real viewpoint, the practical viewpoint.

The real viewpoint, the practical viewpoint - nishchay nay, vyavahar nay.

So what is true? No, both are true in their ways. Why?

Because this focusses...

This viewpoint focusses on the nature.

This viewpoint focusses on the state of the soul.

Nature of the soul, state of the soul.

It may happen that... Is there anyone in the audience who has very long hair?

Stand up and come ahead.

Her hair, braids?

(Wonderful.)

Wonderful... Skin?

(Okay.)

So, is she okay or is she wonderful?

Come on now, don't confuse me. Just tell me, is she okay or is she wonderful?

You may say as loudly as You want, but we'll say both.

It depends from which viewpoint you are seeing this lady.

If you are talking, if you are focussing on the nature, we will say pure,

pure and only pure; absolutely pure.

And if you say my current state, so you will say impure.

If you say Param Krupalu Dev's current state, again, you will say pure, pure and only pure.

Thank you.

So, when the focus is only at different places;

either on the chotla - braids, or on the cheeks. C-C. This will come!

So if the focus is on the braids, the answer is absolutely pure, say nature.

And if the focus is on the cheeks, then you will say, if she put some efforts...

if you put forth true efforts...

If you want to attain the supreme truth, make true efforts.

So the Guru does not have to do a lot of spiritual practices to accept that fellow.

When we come across someone whose opinion is diverse or opposite,

just to accept them, we have to actually

recollect the words of the Enlightened Ones;

'Oh God, give me strength to see good in this person'.

But the Guru does not. Guru has a very nice gear system; automatic gear,

automatic!

If He wants to ensure that he's not offended, then He will switch the gear that way,

and if that person is a seeker and wants to know the complete truth,

then whatever he's missing out..

The ignorant person... this is the main problem of ignorance;

it only wants to hold one.

Either the soul is absolutely pure or the soul is absolutely bound.

Both are true,

but, either you want to hold this, or this,

and that becomes a partial truth, which is false.

This way you cannot attain Self-realisation.

You may be so right in your viewpoint,

but considering it the complete description of the soul; complete, you become wrong.

So see the beauty - all this nature, state; nothing, no word is mentioned here,

and still everything I'm taking out from this verse only.

Keval hota - if it's absolutely non-attached - asang,

why isn't it experienced by you?

Simple logic. Why logic also? Experience!

What you can experience now? That I can't experience the soul.

That is your experience right now. So you can't be absolutely pure.

Why aren't you experiencing your soul? Because you are impure.

Don't think so much, everything is in the verse.

Because you are impure, you can't. Why are you impure?

Because you are bound by karmas.

So, who acquired all these karmas?

You! Then you are the doer; finished.

Now, see the beauty in the last three words, asang chhe - soul is non-attached!

He accepts it, soul is non-attached, parmarthathi - from the absolute viewpoint,

which focusses on the nature only.

Nishchay nay focusses on the nature of the soul only, so it is non-attached only.

Yes, when my binoculars, my camera is on the nature of the soul,

I am finding it satyam - truth, anantam - infinite; I'm finding it pure,

I'm finding it blissful, pure, peaceful, powerful; everything.

So the mantra was

from the absolute viewpoint - I am a pure, peaceful, powerful soul.

In the morning you said Kshamapana; 'Oh Lord, I have forgotten too much, I am a sinner',

and after 10 minutes you are saying, I am a pure, peaceful, powerful soul. Are you...

No, that was from that viewpoint, absolute viewpoint,

that was from the practical viewpoint or the viewpoint which focusses on my current

states.

So I am helpless, I'm a sinner,

I am roaming aimlessly, am lowest of the low;

yes.

But now I don't want you to cry,

I want you to change your focus to your pure, inherent, eternal nature.

So, now what will you say?

Now try to say 'I am a sinner',

'I am helpless, shelterless' - you will not.

You will have to say I am pure, peaceful, powerful; and Param Krupalu Dev's command -

by reflecting over the nature of the soul in such a way, one can attain omniscience.

Not 'I'm the lowest of the low, lowest of the low',

that was only the first station - introspection.

Then I talked about the second station - contemplation;

I am a pure, peaceful, powerful soul.

So from, 'I am a sinner, helpless, bad-tempered etc.',

you came to 'I'm pure, peaceful, powerful',

and then you go beyond this in meditation and you...

So that's what is there - pan nijbhane tem;

nijbhane - on experiencing the pure Self and abiding in that awareness,

you can actually become non-attached.

Meaning, you get rid of karmas and at that particular moment, your state is karmaless.

Nature was karmaless only, but now your state is karmaless.

Fantastic, isn't it? Okay, so...

From the absolute viewpoint, focusing on the nature, you are asang - non-attached.

But, current state - you are full of impurities.

But, when the soul realises its pure nature,

when the soul experiences its flawless nature, and abides in it,

it starts getting rid of karmas - the karmic bondage,

to the extent at one point - end of 14th stage of spiritual development,

it is devoid, it is totally karmaless.

And so, from the vyavaharik viewpoint, practical viewpoint, relative viewpoint also,

he becomes asang - non-attached.

Its nature was non-attached from the absolute viewpoint, even now.

But its state becomes non-attached, when? When he experiences,

pan nijbhane tem - when he experiences his true nature; meaning Self-realisation.

The process starts from Self-realisation,

ends at attainment of liberation.

Little by little, the karmas are reduced until reaching the karmaless state.

Isn't it wonderful?

So it can be concluded, at present the state of the soul is impure, tainted.

At present the state... Again.

At present, the nature of the soul is impure.

Pure? Oh, okay!

At present, the state of the soul is impure, tainted.

So because of that, it continues to indulge

in cravings and aversions - likes, dislikes, simple; because the current state is impure.

And because this impurity of the soul

is instrumental in acquiring the karmic material, particles,

therefore, the soul is the doer of karmas.

That's what was needed to be proved. At present, it definitely is.

Clear?

Let's sing.

Click on any text or timestamp to jump to that moment in the video

Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds

One-Click Copy125+ LanguagesSearch ContentJump to Timestamps

Paste YouTube URL

Enter any YouTube video link to get the full transcript

Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds

Get Our Chrome Extension

Get transcripts instantly without leaving YouTube. Install our Chrome extension for one-click access to any video's transcript directly on the watch page.

Add to Chrome — Free

Works with YouTube, Coursera, Udemy and more educational platforms

Get Instant Transcripts: Just Edit the Domain in Your Address Bar!

YouTube

←

→

↻

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UF8uR6Z6KLc

YoutubeToText

←

→

↻

https://youtubetotext.net/watch?v=UF8uR6Z6KLc

YouTube TranscriptPreparing your results…

YouTube Transcript:Verse 76 - Reply 4 - Soul is not absolutely unbound | Atmasiddhi Shastra Jnan Yajna

AutoDub

Video Transcript

Summary

Core Theme

Paste YouTube URL

Transcript Extraction Form

Get Our Chrome Extension

Get Instant Transcripts: Just Edit the Domain in Your Address Bar!

YouTube Transcript:
Verse 76 - Reply 4 - Soul is not absolutely unbound | Atmasiddhi Shastra Jnan Yajna