Consciousness remains one of science’s great unanswered questions, but Swami Sarvapriyananda believes that the limits of modern explanations are opening a door to ideas that Advaita Vedanta has explored for centuries.
During a one-on-one conversation at the Ringwood Ashram, the monk and spiritual leader of the Vedanta Society of New York spoke about the relationship between the brain and consciousness, the place of artificial intelligence in that debate, and how Vedanta responds to grief, suffering and the pressures of everyday life.
Known internationally for bringing classical Vedantic thought into conversation with science and philosophy, Swami Sarvapriyananda was careful not to claim that modern science and Advaita Vedanta had reached the same conclusions.
“First and foremost, it is a teaching bridge. I must be upfront about that,” he said. “There are many parallels in the modern consciousness studies field, of which neuroscience is a part.”
Questions raised in the philosophy of mind and the scientific study of consciousness, he said, often have corresponding answers within Advaita Vedanta. At the same time, the precise source and nature of consciousness remain unresolved.
“The general idea until about the 1980s or 1990s, and even up to 2000, was that the brain is responsible for consciousness. Even now, a lot of people think that,” he said.
“But the interesting thing is, it is becoming almost impossible to explain how an objective thing, an organ, can generate the subject.”
Scientists can observe electrical and neurochemical activity in the brain and identify neural processes associated with particular experiences. That, Swami Sarvapriyananda said, still does not explain how physical activity produces the inner world of colour, sound, memory, thought and emotion.
“The neural correlates of consciousness one can understand through the study of consciousness. But how the brain is producing consciousness, if at all the brain is prSet featured imageoducing consciousness, has become a big mystery,” he said.
“The more we investigate, in the last 20 years there are literally hundreds of theories, not one or two or three.”
That uncertainty, he argued, allows room to consider whether consciousness may be an independent reality rather than something generated entirely by the brain.
“Maybe the brain does not produce consciousness. Maybe consciousness is an independent reality, as Sankhya says, as Vedanta says,” he said. “This is one area where the door for Vedanta is opened by further developments in science.”
Artificial intelligence presents another version of the same question. AI systems can write, create images, compose music and make decisions, yet there is no evidence that they possess a first-person experience of what they are doing.
“Artificial intelligence has developed to such an extent that decision-making and creativity, writing an essay, painting a picture and making music, all of this AI can do,” he said. “But one thing it cannot do is consciousness, as far as we know. The AIs are not conscious.”
Consciousness, he said, appears simple in one sense because its essential function is to provide subjective experience. Yet immense investment, data and computational power have not shown that machines can acquire it.
“Why is it unable to generate consciousness?” he asked. “The argument which I give is that a material basis cannot lead to the generation of consciousness.”
Swami Sarvapriyananda acknowledged that Advaita Vedanta did not provide every practical answer. The connection between the mind and the brain remained a question that he considered genuinely unresolved.
“We have a mind, nobody doubts it. We also have a brain, nobody doubts it. And the brain and mind are connected. But how and where?” he said.
“How can a little bit of electrical activity and chemical activity in some cells and neurons generate art, music, science, religion, our pleasure and pain, our ideas of personality, and all the complexities of human thought and emotion? Nobody has any idea.”
Advaita proposes consciousness as fundamental and regards the mind as material in the Vedantic sense. It uses the concept of adhyasa, or superimposition, to explain the relationship in principle. But Swami Sarvapriyananda said a detailed account of how the interaction occurs was still awaited.
That distinction between philosophical insight and practical explanation was also evident when the conversation turned to suffering.
Vedanta teaches that a person’s true nature is free and untouched, but grief, pain and loss can feel overwhelmingly real. Swami Sarvapriyananda began his response by examining that phrase itself.
“You said they feel real. Feel to whom? Feel to what?” he asked. “You did not say grief, pain and loss are real. You said they feel real. You are bringing in the subject. You are bringing in the person who is suffering.”
Vedanta, he said, views grief and pain as experiences arising within consciousness. Suffering appears absolute because people identify themselves with the body and mind rather than with consciousness, or the Atman.
“The moment we shift our identity from body and mind to consciousness, we will begin to see that, yes, they will still be there. People will die. One day we will also die,” he said.
“But we realise that it is the body which dies, not me. The bodies die, but we are not limited to the bodies. It makes a tremendous change in perspective.”
That teaching, however, should not be used to dismiss another person’s suffering or avoid difficult circumstances by declaring everything to be Maya, he said.
“Even if I say it is all Maya and disengage from it, Maya will not let you go so easily. Life will not let you go so easily,” he said. “For my own pain and sorrow, you will find it becomes very difficult to dismiss it.”
Quoting Swami Vivekananda, he said a person could not simply run away from the machinery of life, but had to learn how to work through it.
“We must learn unselfishness here. We must learn love here. We must learn attention and focus here. We must learn self-knowledge. Who am I? Only then are you released.”
Nor was the answer merely to “go with the flow”. In his view, liberation often required moving against familiar habits and impulses.
“We are going with the flow. That is why we will not be released,” he said. “You have to go against the flow.”
The law of karma, he explained, provides the mechanism through which a person moves from harmful conduct to virtuous conduct and, eventually, beyond both.
“Going from sinful activities to virtuous activities, developing one’s character and becoming a good person, that is still within Maya. But that is the way to work the machine,” he said.
“Maya is not bad. Samsara is not bad. It is meant to make us spiritual. It is character-building machinery. As long as we do not learn our lessons, we will have to repeat them again and again.”
Everything in life, he said, can teach a person to become more compassionate, ethical and wise.
“It is wiser to be ethical. It is unwise to be unethical. When we realise that, it is a sign of maturity.”
Among the deepest lessons of his own spiritual formation came from Swami Bhuteshananda, the 12th president of the Ramakrishna Math and Ramakrishna Mission, from whom he received mantra diksha.
The first was the ability to see the good in everyone.
“It is easy to say that, but genuinely, when you meet a person who always sees the best in you, that is a wonderful thing,” he said. “When someone sees the best in you, which you might not see yourself, it uplifts you.”
He recalled a European follower of Swami Vivekananda who said that meeting great people usually made her conscious of her own smallness. Vivekananda had the opposite effect.
“When I met Vivekananda, I felt how great he is and how great I am,” Swami Sarvapriyananda recounted. “Vivekananda had that capacity to make you see your own greatness. That I saw in Bhuteshanandaji.”
The second lesson was patience, which he described as a true test of spiritual development.
“Whether it is bhakti, meditation, jnana or seva, our patience is tested,” he said. “Difficult people, difficult circumstances and bad health, can you patiently withstand them?”
The third was love, expressed not as an abstract teaching but through undivided attention to whoever stood before him.
“If you went in front of him, you felt you were at the centre of his attention and love,” he said. “From that moment, nothing else mattered to him except you. That is something to watch and learn. It is not easy.”
One of the most common misunderstandings about Advaita Vedanta, he said, came from the statement Brahma satyam, jagat mithya, commonly translated as Brahman is real and the world is false.
“That is a method. That is not the final position,” he said.
The final teaching is Ekameva Advitiyam, the existence of one non-dual reality.
“It is not that one Satchidananda is there and one false world is also there, like a shadow or a ghost,” he said. “By using the apparent falsity of the world, one discovers that it is the non-dual Brahman alone appearing as that. There is only one reality. That oneness is the teaching of Vedanta.”
The Mahavakyas, particularly Tat Tvam Asi and Aham Brahmasmi, remained teachings to which he returned.
“To know that the divinity you are searching for is always with you, that it is you, gives a lot of peace,” he said. “It can never be lost, even in the worst moments of life.”
“You can never be completely defeated or completely destroyed in life. We are already immortal beings. That teaching is a message of great hope.”
Swami Sarvapriyananda closed with a reversal of a familiar idea about the spiritual search.
“People think we are human beings in search of a spiritual experience,” he said. “But the truth is that we are spiritual beings having a human experience.”
He added another observation that captured the practical heart of the conversation: “The person will never be free, but you can be free of the person.”
Support independent community journalism. Support The Indian Sun.
Follow The Indian Sun on X | Instagram | Facebook
Support Independent Community Journalism
Dear Reader,The Indian Sun exists for one reason: to tell stories that might otherwise go unheard.
We report on local councils, state politics, small businesses and cultural festivals. We focus on the Indian diaspora and the wider multicultural community with care, balance and accountability. We publish in print and online, send regular newsletters and produce video content. We also run media training programs to help community organisations share their own stories.
We operate independently.
Community journalism does not have the backing of large media corporations. Advertising revenue fluctuates. Platform algorithms change. Costs continue to rise. Yet the need for credible, grounded reporting in a multicultural Australia has never been greater.
When you support The Indian Sun, you support:
• Independent reporting on issues affecting migrant communities
• Coverage of local and state decisions that shape daily life
• A platform for small businesses and community groups
• Media training that builds skills within the community
• Journalism accountable to readers
We cannot cover everything, but we work to cover what matters.
If you value thoughtful reporting that reflects Australia’s diversity, we invite you to contribute. Every donation helps us maintain the quality and consistency of our work.
Please consider making a contribution today.
Thank you for your support.
The Indian Sun Team
