"…The conventional sense of self or ego – I am American. I am a man or woman or Catholic or Hindu – is not something that is inherently joyful. It is a very limited sense of self that appears to be threatened with non-existence. We kind of know it, but we ignore it. Death is all around us… This conventional self is on the circumference of a blissful center, so there is some prospect that we could be happy. And this prospect is what makes the whole thing worth living. But, unfortunately, there is some false advertising there in terms of arriving at the measure of happiness or joy that we would like to arrive at, without an inhibiting factor, in an enduring sense, without end…"

The movement of consciousness is to grow, to expand, mystically, if you will. And we do this by giving. It appears to be going in a backward direction. By giving, I should be less, mathematically. If I have this much and I give that much away, I should have less. But the magic of life is the more you really give, the more you sacrifice, the more you grow. We have this experience. It is mystical. We give and we grow…in a way that can’t be measured but we know, none the less, and it can be conveyed to others just by our being…

"You could exist and not know about it. You could exist and know about it, but you might not love it. But you cannot love without existing and knowing that you exist. So the loving moment of the Absolute is the full moment. And being, (existing) and knowing is a derivative of that, by necessity. If the Absolute is loving, if Brahman is ananda, if the absolute is anandam, then it has to exist and it has to know and these are derivative of its nature as a lover. Bhakti, that discipline for killing the material ego, is not only concerned with killing that ego but it wants to move beyond 'I am' and 'I know and I know that I exist', to 'I exist to love'."

This class contains two discussions: One on the progression of transcendent experience and the second, at the 51 minute mark, on proving the existence of God.

The first topic: Relative to the different disciplines there are differing degrees of penetration into transcendence. There is the ending of the material ego. There is the ending of the material ego combined with the sense of the eternal being, oneness, unity. And there is the ending of the material ego, the sense of being consciousness, plus a subtle distinction that makes for an ongoing interaction between the atma and Paramatma - the distinction that makes Brahman move not out of need but of ecstasy. And within that there are differing degrees.

The second topic: Before we talk about the existence of God, let's talk about the existence of ourselves. Consciousness is the mystery of the day. Physicalists theorize about it pretty well. Some say that, if we were to get rid of the "religious baggage" that makes us think we are more than what meets the eye, then in 1000 years of science they will be able to demonstrate that consciousness is matter. All of this "science" is at the cost of finding the self that we talk about that is possible by another science, the science of yoga. If you want to be objective, we ask you to undergo this experiment - detach yourself from matter. You will get experiential subjective proof that is objectively verifiable.

When asked to speak about the pluralism in the world’s religions regarding sacrifice, wisdom and love, Swami Tripurari begins by explaining, …”Across the board of major religions we find 2 expressions of religious life - a religious orientation and an experiential orientation. The religious should lead to the experiential, the mystical heart, of religion, but they don’t always do that. And there is reason for that..”

"We want enduring life in a meaningful way. No one wants to die. Pursuance of enduring life in relation to things that don't endure makes no sense"

We keep looking in the brain for the one neuron that when we push on it, it says “I”, “experience”. From the point of view from Vedanta, this is a very foolish and costly venture to try to prove that consciousness is the brain. If I have a billiard ball, I wouldn’t ever expect it to say, “Hey, could you hit me a little softer.” Your brain cells are made up of the same thing that the billiard ball is. Is there any way we could squeeze that ball to make it say “Ouch!”. Matter is non-experiential. Consciousness is experiential. How different is that? …That is worlds apart.

Throughout human society - from the most primitive forms of society to the most civilized and intellectually advanced - we find a common sense that life has a purpose, a meaning.