16.1 The Second Indicator Of Brahman - The Womb Of Scripture (Shaastra Yonitva)

There is a mantra in the Shvetaashvatara Upanishad : "That which, in the beginning of creation, creates Brahmaa (Hiranyagarbha) and that which produces the Vedas for him, that Lord who illuminates my intellect, I, the seeker, take his refuge" (Shvetaashvatara Upanishad 6.18).
 
The Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad also says : "The Rig Veda and other Vedas, like the breath of a person, spontaneously arise from the great existence-form cause brahman" (Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad 2 4.10).
 
Here is what these shrutis mean. The root of all knowledge in creation is Ishvara. In other words, Ishvara is omniscient. Therefore, if we investigate our own knowledge - this "I" knowledge, where is it dawning from, then we will find Ishvara alone in the root of the "I". No matter what we do to worship Ishvara, we will always have to return to the root of "I" for attaining Ishvara. The knowledge of the waking and dream states is under the refuge of this dawned "I". This dawned "I" resolves (leena) in deep sleep. The refuge of this resolution is that praanya, that Ishvara alone. In that, the seed of the "I" - ignorance, desire and action - when these are negated, it is that Ishvara, praajnya, Tureeya alone which is called brahman by the shruti.
 
The nature of brahman is existence-consciousness-bliss. When we join the adjunct of action with it, then the reality appears in the form of the all-powerful great-doer, awareness appears in the form of the omniscient, and bliss appears in the form of the great enjoyer. We are the ones who join the adjuncts, we apply the mark on the forehead, and he comes down in the photo. This very great doer, knower and enjoyer is widely known as Ishvara.
 
Opposed to this, the soul in this body is also adjuncted. Due to the minor adjunct of action, the existence-consciousness-bliss brahman alone appears and is widely known as the minor doer, knower and enjoyer soul in this body.
 
Substratum-ness, stimulating-ness (prerakataa), omniscience - these are the adjuncted accidents (upadrava) of awareness. Superimposition-ness, restrained-ness and limited knowledge - these are also the adjuncted accidents of awareness. The only difference between Ishvara and the soul are these accidents alone, not in the absolute sense.
 
Does this Ishvara live in our body or not? He does. The cause is incorporated in the effect. Where in the soul we find the body-mind-senses which are the effect adjuncts, there, their cause Prakriti, which is the adjunct of Ishvara, will always be present. But, in reality, the effect is imagined in the cause. That is why, the soul is imagined in Ishvara alone. We do know the soul, but we never know its Ishvara-ness. That is why, even thought Ishvara is living now, here, in this very body, he is unknown to us.
 
There is so much knowledge, science, administration, so many intellects that come out of this world, what is their source? Just like Ishvara is the all-seed cause (sarva beejaatmaka kaarana), in the same way, he is also the all-seed cause of all knowledge. All scriptures are the shadow of his knowledge alone. It is the reflection (aabhaasa) in our inner organ of his knowledge alone, due to which all souls are having limited intellect, and Ishvara is having omniscience.
 
This point in the Vedanta philosophy is known as "shaastra yonitvaat" (Brahma Sootra 1.1.3). By combining this with the sootra "janmaadasya yataha", we conclude that behind the divided reality and divided knowledge of the world, there is one cause of all which is an undivided reality brahman which is undivided knowledge-nature.
 
Just like world causality, the indicator of brahman, is the means to attain the non-duality in the existence aspect of brahman, similarly, omniscience or being the womb of scripture, this indicator of brahman is the means to attain the non-duality in the awareness aspect of brahman. The substratum of the name-form-shaped scene world is the with-seed brahman, in other words, Ishvara. And he is non-dual, therefore the name-form shapes are illusory. He who knows these illusory name-form-shapes and their differences, he is the thought-flow oriented soul. He is also non-dual, because all those flows of knowledge are illuminated by this very soul. Now there cannot be two non-dual entities therefore, that which is the substratum of the world, also is its witness. In the midst, the illusory scene cannot be the real differentiator between the soul and Ishvara.
 
The self is brahman. This fact is pointed out by the great statements. But, since the world has come out of that brahman, lives in that brahman, and dissolves into that brahman, and also by being illumined by it, there is no other entity in the immediate non-distinct-from-awareness brahman element.
 
This is the process for investigation into Ishvara. We need to search for the seed, the root of this very body, of our intellect. The root of both is brahman. But the seed of each is different. It is like the material cause or substratum of all seeds are the five elements, but the impressions in each seed are different. Similarly, the seed of the body is action and the desire to enjoy. The seed of the intellect is praajnya or thought-flow-less knowledge. But the material cause of both, the substratum of both is brahman.
 
It is like this. There are two states in the inert creation - creation and dissolution. In the microcosmic life there are two states - waking and deep sleep. Similarly, the intellect of some is awake whereas of some, it is asleep. The material cause of both awake and asleep in the microcosmic life is the knower, praajnya. Even in the macrocosmic life, the material cause of the intellect is the knower, Ishvara. Both praanjya and Ishvara are one.
 
While performing discrimination, two techniques are adopted : desire and desire-filled intellect, and its place of dissolution. The seed is neither reality, nor conscious, nor bliss. Due to ignorance, there is an I-oriented disconnection in our existence, our knowledge and our happiness. By taking refuge of this disconnection there is sustenance of the microcosmic intellect, microcosmic desire and microcosmic shape. This disconnected "I" is the first effect of ignorance. This alone is reverse perception (viparyaya) and this alone is veiling (aavarana). To be freed from this alone do we pursue contemplation of Vedanta.
 
Praajnya is the place of dissolution of desire and intellect. Ishvara is the place of dissolution of all shapes. But, that which has the seed of the intellect, alone contains the seed of shapes, since in deep sleep, intellect and shapes both become one, and only the witness remains. Similarly, even in the macrocosm, there is one state where form-shapes and intellect, both resolve into one awareness. Afterwards, from that alone, from that all-knowing Ishvara, just like there is disappearance of shapes, similarly, it happens to the intellect. Even this connecting intelligence disappears - "this form is named so-and-so". This is a shruti.
 
That intellect which divides names and forms, it ascends onto sound and only then does it divide name and form. It is the result of this intellect alone which brings forth all scriptures of the world, beyond the world and of the absolute, as well as their root, such as the Rig Veda etc. That is why the philosophy of Vedanta denotes brahman as the womb of all scripture.
 
The awareness which is adjuncted by the seed of the world and of scripture is called Ishvara. When this Veda manifested, which intellect did it come from? Ishvara, who is the macrocosmic intellect (Hiranyagarbha), in that it was lying resolved. During the tine of creation, from that alone where many universes were born, at the same time Veda was also born. Just like Ishvara sprouted the seeds of resolved shapes, similarly, he also sprouted the resolved sounds that would illuminate meaning. In other worlds, the sequential illumining of meaning was done by Ishvara during creation. The sounds that reveal meaning are called "shabda".
 
The root of sound is the all-knowing Ishvara. And this which manifested the waking and dreaming states and knows the the deep sleep state is the soul self, since they are both aware, they both are one. While sleeping, just like word and shape, their connecting intelligence and their sequence (aanupoorvee) - all attain the seed state and become known to the witness in deep sleep. After the waking state comes, they go back to their original states. Similarly, in the state of dissolution (pralaya), all shapes, sounds and their sequence resolves into a seed state and they become known to the witness Ishvara. When creation comes, they go back to their original state. Both these situations are one and the same. That is why, the all-knowing awareness which is in them is also one. He alone is the self awareness and also the Ishvara awareness.
 
The revealer of truth and illusion, and of duty and non-duty, those particular sounds, their sequence is called Veda. This Veda can be seen in a particular state of the mind and vital force. When the mind is taken from Vaikhari into Madhyamaa, from Madhyamaa into Pashyantee, from Pashyantee into Paraa, in other words, by identifying with the Paraa-vaaka, the Veda mantras are revealed. They are seen as well as heard. The Veda mantras do not just describe India, they also describe the entire universe. It is not a description of just one time period, it describes all past, present and future states. It does not describe Ishvara per one sect, it describes the universal Ishvara. The Veda says that every name is the supreme Ishvara, every form is the supreme Ishvara, every shape is the supreme Ishvara, and every intellect is the supreme Ishvara, because all have their basis in the substratum brahman. The substratum of all is one, and nothing is ascribed. Such an undivided supreme brahman, supreme self is described in the Vedas. Such a timeless, obtained from a non-disconnected tradition, "asmarya maanaa kartrika", that ever sequential knowledge, this is called Veda. Only after that knowledge does the distinction of time arise, not prior. That is why knowledge is not created by a doer, it is the illuminator of the doer. Knowledge cannot ever be destroyed, since it has been attained in such a way that traditions are born from it and resolve into it. Such a storehouse of knowledge is called Veda.
 
If we understand the meaning of the word "Veda" properly, we will know our self. The conclusion of the Vedas is the knowledge of the identity of the self and brahman, and even this knowledge arises from the Vedas. The Vedas exist in two forms : word-storehouse and meaning-storehouse. In the form of word-storehouse, the Veda is imagined knowledge. In the form of meaning-storehouse, the Veda is non-imagined (akalpita) knowledge. Attaining non-imagined knowledge through imagined knowledge is the aim of the Vedas.
 
Veda is imagined beginningless and self is non-imagined beginningless. Veda is "asmarya maanaa kartrika", and the self is "akartrika jnyaana svaroopa". Veda illumines even the non-human-ness (apaurusheya) in other words, it is not the composition of a human and it is not a particular thought flow whereas the self illumines even the non-human-ness. The Veda is attained through an unbroken tradition, and the self is incorporated in every cognition. Therefore, the Veda is the indicator (tatastha lakshana) of the knowledge-form self.
 
The question is, did Ishvara compose the Vedas? If not Ishvara, then who did? If it was Ishvara then did he compose it in the Sanskrit language? This and many other questions arise in the minds of doubting non-Vedic curious people. First, let us examine the various opinions on this topic.
 
1. Materialists (Chaaravaakaas) abusively say that the Vedas were composed by crafty people. In reality, the Vedas assert the self, rebirth, heaven, doer, witness, Ishvara, brahman, ritual, priest and so on. These statements run counter to the materialists. Therefore, it is natural that they abuse the Vedas.
 
2. Buddhists and Jains accept that Vedas were composed by humans. But in their opinion, there are four flaws in humans: delusion, laziness, deceit and incapacity of the intellect. Therefore, it is not correct to accept the Vedas as a complete means. Only the statements of those great saints who have a pure mind without desire should be accepted as real means.
 
3. Nyaaya and Vaisheshikas believe that the Vedas were composed not by humans, but by Ishvara. For them, Ishvara is the intelligent cause of the world, not the material cause. They take atoms to be the material cause. That is why, when Ishvara creates the world out of atoms, then he also creates the Vedas. The Veda means the constitution of the world created by Ishvara. Now, since Ishvara is omniscient, his creation, the Veda, is also free from the flaws of delusion, laziness, deceit and intellectual incapacity.
 
4. Formless Ishvara school followers have to face a problem. How did Ishvara create these scriptures? For some, they will be seen to be written in the sky, and for some they will seem to be written on paper. Aarya Samaaja followers said that the Vedas did not appear in the sky but appeared in the hearts of sages, where the knowledge of language and meaning existed. For instance, the Gaayatri mantra appeared in the heart of sage Vishvaamitra.
 
5. Form-oriented Ishvara followers say that Naaraayana remembers the Vedas. He narrates the Vedas to Brahmaa at the beginning of creation. This is how the teacher-student tradition starts and continues.
 
6. Lord Shree Shankaraachaarya says that besides the omniscient Ishvara, there cannot be any other doer of the Vedas, since the multitude of sages and philosophers invigorate the Vedas after accepting them first, and then say their statements. Like he illumines the world, Ishvara also illumines the Vedas. Just like the world dawns and sets in Ishvara, the Vedas also dawn and set in Ishvara. The root of the world and of the Vedas both is Ishvara alone.
 
7. Patanjali, who is a Yoga philosopher, accepts Ishvara as free from the five afflictions (kleshas), joy-sorrow and desire, as well as non-disconnected from time immemorial and permanently, as well as the teacher of all beings. But he accepts the residence of the Vedas in the intellect of Ishvara. Therefore, through discrimination, when the speech of a soul gains the qualification of being one with the Paraa speech, then the intellect of the witness identifies with the intellect of the omniscient Ishvara, and the Vedas present in the intellect of the omniscient one is revealed to the him.
 
8. Saankhya philosophy accepts the same viewpoint as the Yoga philosophy. The Taantrikas also accept the same viewpoint.
 
9. The Poorva Mimaamsaa followers believe that the Veda stays timelessly in the form of statements. In their opinion, the creation is timeless, it is neither created, nor will it be destroyed. In that timeless creation, even the Vedas are timeless, and their alphabets, words, statements etc. are all eternal. That is why the question of who created the Vedas does not arise. They do not accept Ishvara. Creation is beginningless-endless and so are the Vedas.
 
Vedanta accepts the creation and dissolution of the world even if it is in the category of ascribing (adhyaaropa). Therefore, it also accepts the resolving of the Vedas in Ishvara and also their arising. This point is proven by the Vedas also.
 
Both Poorva Mimaamsaa and Vedanta agree that Ishvara did not create the Vedas. Poorva Mimaamsa does so since it does not believe in Ishvara. And in Vedanta, the Vedas which resolved into Ishvara again arise from Ishvara, therefore they are not created by Ishvara.
 
The shruti of the Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad (2.4.10) says that the Veda is the breath of the supreme Ishvara. Breath is the indication of a living entity. That is why, so long as the Vedic science is alive, Ishvara is also alive. Ishvara is the breather and the Veda is the breath. If we deride the breath alone, then where will we find Ishvara? Ishvara is indestructible, and his breath also is imperishable.

16.0 Contemplation Of The Ishvara Entity II

15.6 Ishvara And Praajnya

Brahman has been called "four legged" or "chatushpaada" in the Maandookya Upanishad. The first leg is Vishva Viraata, the second leg is Taijasa-hiranyagarbha, third leg is Praajnya and that alone is said to be the all-Ishvara or sarveshvara, omniscient, inner controller and the womb of creation of allbeings. Also, the fourth leg is itself the self which is incorporated into the prior three legs, yet is distinct from those three.
 
The seed state of the world alone is pointed out here in the form of deep sleep. Like, there are three states of a tree : seed, sprout and tree. Similarly, the brahman essence indicated by the seed state of the tree in the form of the world is called praajnya or Ishvara, brahman indicated by the subtle sprout state is called Taijasa-Hiranyagarbha, and brahman indicated by the gross state is called Vishva Viraata.
 
The difference of various organs of the tree is present in the seed, but is not visible. The difference of various objects is present in the darkness of the night, yet is not visible, it looks like one entity. Similarly, everything has become one-formed in deep sleep, this is what is known after contemplation. In Ishvara also, the world is in a one-form state. The cause always is one.
 
Waking state and dream state are sparks of the mind. These are "prajnyaana", exceptional knowledge. In deep sleep, these sparks become one-formed - they become one mass. That is why, Ishvara is a mass of knowledge, and except knowledge, there is no other dissimilar inert object in it.
 
The effort in the form of creation-sustenance (or the mental effort of the subject-object in the waking and ream) is not found in the deep-sleep situated Ishvara. Therefore, it is the state of effortless happiness. There, we find a reality which is free from the infinite name-form differences, and the knowledge of this as well. This alone is happiness. Ishvara or praajnya is effortless happiness. Therefore, it is of the nature of bliss. In transactional language, Ishvara is the enjoyer of this bliss, this is said. But in reality, he is bliss alone.
 
Ishvara is the door to the awareness of waking and dream, in other words, Ishvara is their seed. The awareness of Vishva and Taijasa arises from Ishvara. Therefore, Ishvara is the mouth of awareness or "cheto mukha".
 
Ishvara is called praajnya because there is only the knowledge-alone, devoid of knower-known. The state devoid of knower-known in the microcosm is deep sleep, and in the macrocosm, that of great dissolution. Therefore, that awareness which remains in deep sleep, which is the witness of deep sleep, that alone will remain in the great dissolution and will be the witness of the great dissolution. After the end of deep sleep or of the great dissolution, when the eon (kalpa) begins, the entire gamut of beings will arise from that alone. Therefore, Ishvara alone is the door or womb of creation. That is why, the race of all beings in creation is the same as that of Ishvara. In other words, existence-consciousness-bliss and Ishvara alone are the material cause of all. Since it is aware, it is also the intelligent cause. And since it is all-formed (sarva roopa), it is also the enabling cause and general cause as well.
 
Ishvara is omniscient, that is why he is not an inert known but an aware knower. At the time when the creation lies in a seed form, he alone keeps it in that form. When it expands, then at that time, he alone is its inner-controller-formed coordinator and knower.
 
By being the knower of the three states of waking, dreaming and deep sleep, you are omniscient. By being the controller of the vital forces and other activities of deep sleep, and controller of activities of waking and dream states, you are the all-inner-controller.
 
Some philosophers accept Ishvara as indifferent (tatastha) to the world. But the Ishvara of the Vedas is not indifferent. He is the non-distinct-material-intelligent cause of all. Which means he is both the clay and the potter. Can clay ever be indifferent to the pot? No. Similarly, Ishvara cannot be indifferent to creation. Then, where does Ishvara stay? This question is wrong since Ishvara is there, here, everywhere.
 
The Taittireeya shruti says : "That Ishvara willed that I should become many, therefore he performed penance and whatever is created is out of that penance. He created all this and entered into it (Taittireeya 1.6.1)".
 
In the Aiteraya Upanishad also, it is said that "Prior to the manifestation of the names and forms of the world, there was the one self alone, and nothing else (Aitareya Upanishad 1.1.1)". That self alone willed that I should create all the worlds. After that, he created all the worlds. With this, the awareness of the self, or of Ishvara, or of brahman, is clear. It is also clear that the world is in the willing of Ishvara, therefore its state is like that of the dream: It is seen for sure, it is transactional also, but in the real nature of brahman, it is negated in all three states.
 
The Mundaka Upanishad shruti says: That imperishable brahman which is omniscient and all knowing, whose penance is knowledge-based, from that alone have these names, forms and gross beings created (Mundaka Upanishad 1.1.9). In this manner, in the all-knowing, all-powerful Ishvara or brahman, by the knowledge-based knower-formed penance of the names and forms, this world has been created, or is as-if created.
 
What is the process of the creation of the world? There is no single agreement of this in the Upanishads. The Mundaka Upanishad (2.1.3) says that the earth and all other elements were created simultaneously. In the Taittireeya, they were created sequentially: space from brahman, air from space, fire from air, water from fire, earth from water (2.1). In the Chhandogya, three elements - space, light and water - were created. In the Shvetaashvatara, the maaya-wielding Ishvara created the world out of maayaa (4.10). It is also said that there is no effect of maaya (6.8). So then, is this the crazy rambling of the shruti?
 
The secret here is that the shruti does not intend to reveal the process of creation. It intends, by first ascribing world causality upon brahman, and then negating it, to reveal the non-dual nature of the self. Here is the logic. The world is non-different than brahman, like dream is non-distinct from the witness of the dream, like snake etc. errors are non-distinct from their substratum, like clay objects are non-distinct than clay etc. Also, the self is non-distinct from brahman, since the world (prapancha) which is the differentiator between soul-awareness and Ishvara-awareness, is non-distinct from brahman to begin with. Therefore, there is the non-dual brahman alone. This is proved.
 
The Upanishads agree on the following points with regards to Ishvara:
1. Ishvara is the reverse (vivartee) non-distinct-intelligent-material cause of the world.
2. Ishvara is of the form of existence-consciousness-bliss, omniscient, omnipotent, all-controller, all-inner-controller, and all-pervading.
3. Ishvara alone is to be worshipped, and he stays in the intellect-formed cave of the soul.
4. Connecting to Ishvara alone is his worship. This connection is accomplished by emotion and thought alone.
5. Ishvara, in all forms, is the seedless brahman, and from the viewpoint of the world (for purpose of worship or ascribing) is the root cause of all , therefore he is the with-seed brahman.

15.5 The All-Pervasiveness Of Brahman: Its Meaning

The meaning of brahman's all-pervasiveness must be understood. One kind of pervasiveness is like that of fire in an iron ball. You put an iron ball in fire and it becomes red, the fire pervades the iron ball. This is the pervasiveness of one thing in another, pervasiveness of a subtle thing in a gross thing. This is called "moorta samyogitva roopa vyaapakataa". Most people consider this to be the pervasiveness of the supreme self. They think that the world is gross and in this, the subtle entity brahman has pervaded. Even in the Upanishads, this kind of pervasiveness is described.
 
Another form of pervasiveness is that where the material cause pervades its effect. It is like the material cause clay pervades its effect, which is the pot. Here, the cause which is clay, and the effect which is the pot, are not two distinct objects. The pot is of the form of clay alone. All that has happened is that a particular form of the clay has taken place, like the pot, the cup and so on. The variety of names is transactional, not real. Even this kind of pervasiveness is mentioned in the Upanishads. Similarly, pervasiveness of water in wave, fire in spark, wind in vital force, and great space in pot space, all these are illustrations.
 
A third kind of pervasiveness is that like the seed and the tree. Here, the impressions resident in the seed pervade the tree. The five elements are the same in the seed and the tree both. In the materials of the dream, the impressions of the waking state pervade. Similarly, in the person, the prior impressions of the soul pervade. The root will of Ishvara is "may I become many", this is pervaded in the always-growing creation.
 
In the scene of the dream, the mind pervades. The seed of the waking and dream scenes lies in the deep sleep state. Therefore, deep sleep alone pervades in the waking and dream states. This is clearly explained in the Maandookya Upanishad.
 
The fourth type of pervasiveness is like that of the sun rays in the earth planet. The sun is situated distinctly, is disconnected, but its heat and light pervades our planet's space. Similarly, Ishvara is found in some space, but pervades this earth planet by his power. This is the opinion of those devotees who consider Ishvara to be indifferent. This is not accepted in Vedanta. But, in all spaces, in the brahman present in the form of existence, for the purpose of worship etc., the imagination of a specific place etc. in the category of superimposition is also acceptable to Vedanta.
 
The fifth type of pervasiveness is like that of the delusion-created material on the substratum. It is like the rope pervades the snake, sky pervades the blueness, the post pervades the person. In Vedanta, this pervasiveness is accepted. The world in brahman, and the I-sense in the self, is never present in all three times. But due to the ignorance of brahman, the world appears and due to the ignorance of the self, the soul-ness appears. Therefore, from the vision of knowledge, there is neither the world nor the I-sense. There is only brahman alone. Then what will pervade what else. That is why the Tejobindu Upanishad shruti says that pervasiveness and pervaded are illusory. In this meaning, the pervasiveness of brahman reaches its ultimate conclusion.

15.4 The Omniscience-omnipotence Inner-controller-ness Of Brahman - Its Meaning

Vedanta has a particular method. It first proves the tiny adjuncted soul, then it proves the all-adjuncted Ishvara, and then proves the non-difference in the non-particular awareness-only. The final conclusion here is that brahman is awareness-only and it only is the substratum of the creation, sustenance and dissolution of the world. That brahman is not just the instrumental cause of creation etc., it is also the material cause. Apart from this, since it is the womb of scripture, and since we see complete order and arrangement in the world, brahman should also be omniscient and omnipotent. In the scripture, the brahman essence which is indicated by the cause of birth etc. of the world, is given the name of Ishvara. He is also omniscient, omnipotent and all-pervading. Through the "that" aspect (tat pada), the shruti has indicated the entire adjuncted awareness. The literal meaning of the "you" aspect is the soul, and the indicated meaning is the pure witness or the inner self. The literal meaning of the "that" aspect is Ishvara and the indicated meaning is the adjunct-less brahman. "You are that", this statement reveals the identity of these two indicated meanings. Through the vision of this non-difference, the adjuncts of both soul and Ishvara are pointed out as illusory.
 
Question: Per sage Yaska, every object in this world undergoes birth, existence, growth, change, decay and death, all these 6 state changes. Therefore, instead of causality of birth etc. of this world, can we accept the causality of these six state changes as the indication of brahman?
 
Answer: This is umwarranted stretching of the definition (ativyaapti dosha). The refuge of state changes within objects can also be noted as the five elements or Prakriti. Therefore, we will have to accept brahman as the inert five elements or inert Prakriti which is not conducive to Vedanta. Also, in Vedanta, the shruti is the primary means. So then, we will have to accept the causality of birth etc. of the world as the indication of brahman, which is mentioned in the shruti. Five elements and Prakriti are undoubtedly the world alone. The experience of their birth etc. happens through that awareness which is brahman.
 
Question: In the absence of shruti, can we still accept Prakriti etc. alone as the cause of the world?
 
Answer: All these causes are counter to logic and are also contradictory. World was created from four elements (Chaaravaaka), creation happened through continuous moving imperishable inert matter (Marxist), through void or science (Buddhist), created from Pudgal (Jain), created by action (Poorva Mimaamsaa), creation with atoms (Nyaaya Vaisheshika), created by the non-aware Pradhaana (Saankhya), created by a deity, soul or Hiranyagarbha (devotee), all these opinions use inference as their means, and depend upon intellectualization.
 
It is not possible for any of these causes to be visible, since whomever is the seer of that visible means will be separate from the world, which is what is being investigated here. Four cannot be the cause, since there has to be a cause of those four. If the creation has come out of inertness, then we should also be inert, but we never have the experience that "I am inert". Accepting void as the cause cannot be proven transactionally, there is even no illustration for this. Science is momentary, therefore the stability of the world which is experienced also cannot be possible. Action itself is inert, it cannot be accepted without some other aware element. Atoms are indivisible, how is their association possible? If you accept Pradhaana as the doer, how do we see transgressions in rules? Why are the rules of Prakriti so orderly and firm? The soul is disconnected, with limited intellect and subservient. Therefore, even if he is the best soul, he cannot become the doer of the entire world. Since the soul is adjuncted, it cannot be independent, and the adjunct itself is the world whose cause is being investigated. Hiranyagarbha is also a soul, since the shruti speaks of its creation (Shvetaashvatara 6.18).
 
Since all of these contradict each other, there cannot be any philosophy here. Only that reality can be described as the cause which can be the cause even of all of these. Tulsidas has called this as "Ishvara" alone. Vedanta posits that this world is an effect of the omniscient, omnipotent, supreme Ishvara. And what is Ishvara? The brahman which is indicated by the casuality of the world is Ishvara.
 
The omni in omniscient is a pointer to the material cause, and the "scient", of the intelligent cause. In other words, that which is omniscient is the clay and potter, both, of this world. It is the non-distinct-intelligent-material cause brahman. The creator and the created are one.
 
(sarva = all/omni, jnya = scient). Jnya knows the sarva. Therefore, in the sarvajnya, the jnya aspect is changeless and sarva aspect changeful, even so, both are one in sarvajnya. Now, is the sarva the effect of the jnya, or the error (vivarta) of jnya? In other words, is sarva the transformation of jnya or does the jnya remain as it is, yet be experienced as the sarva? There is no transformation (parinaama) possible in knowledge otherwise there will be no knowledge of the transformation. That is why, that which is the all-form and the knower of all from a transactional sense, is the non-dual brahman fundamentally. This alone is the meaning of the word "sarvajnya" in other words, the erroneous (vivartee) non-dual intelligent material cause brahman. In Vedanta, this meaning alone is accepted for the term "sarvajnya".
 
The "Nyaayanirnayakaara" says that there are two meanings of sarvajnya : non-dual reality and existence-consciousness reality. By being the erroneous substratum, sarvajnya means non-dual. And since it itself is the root of the sarva which is existence, and the root of the jnya which is consciousness, it is existence-consciousness. The transformationless non-negated reality is existence and self-illumined all-illuminator is knowledge. Therefore, sarvajnya means : non-negated non-dual changeless conscious reality.
 
What is the difference between self-reality and Ishvara-reality? "That" (Ishvara) is in that space, in that time, and "you" (self) is in this space, and this time. Both are of the nature of existence-consciousness-bliss. But, in the oneness of both, there is separation of space, time and matter. "You are that", this great statement negates this separation, and restores the proven oneness of both. That aware-only entity which is indicated by the absence of space, time and matter, its oneness is demonstrated by Vedanta. It is in this direction that there is ascribing and refutation of causality in brahman.
 
Now, let us focus on the word omnipotent. Omnipotent means the power to do anything. Electricity is a form of energy that has the power to heat, cool, light, burn, attract through magnetism etc. Power can be inferred from its effect. But the power in inert and aware is different. The power in inert is subservient, whereas the power in aware is independent. Independence means: the power to act, to not act, or to act in an opposite manner. The power in inert is very limited and acts according to rules. The aware can break these rules. Therefore, when the aware brahman, Ishvara, supreme self is called omnipotent, it means that the supreme self is fully independent, it can act/not act/act opposite. This is also the secret of the diversity of this world.
 
By being the material cause of all, brahman is omni-form (sarvaroopa), by being omniscient it is the transformation-less erroneous substratum, and by being omnipotent it is independent, supreme-bliss-nature. The intent of calling Ishvara omnipotent and omniscient is to denote him to be the existence-conscious-awareness non-dual brahman. Shruti says: All this is a mass of knowledge (Brihadaarnyaka 4.5.13). You are such a brahman (Brahma Sootra 3.2.16).

15.3 Brahman Transcends Cause And Effect : Contemplation From Viewpoint Of Existence-Consciousness-Bliss

Even though the notion of cause and effect is illusory, yet it can be used to indicate that entity which transcends cause and effect, brahman. This is asserted by the Vedanta philosophy. On this, there is a doubt. When the cause and effect notion is illusory, then why do followers of Vedanta describe it as the cause of the birth etc. of the world? In reality, this is a gentle remedy. It is like a boil which can either be cured with an operation or with medication. Medication is the gentler remedy. In this manner, if someone realizes brahman through the cause and effect notion, then it will be termed as a gentle remedy.
 
Vedanta is cause-oriented diagnosis, not disease-oriented. In other words, it goes to the root cause of the disease, does not suppress the disease. Sanctioned action (dharma) and worship alter the nature of our thought flow, which suppress the disease of this world. But, Vedanta goes to the root of this world disease by removing the delusion of duality, cures it. In the course of this cure, the ascribing of world causality in brahman plays a major role.
 
On one hand, we talk of brahman as distinct from the world, by which its true nature is purified (for investigation), on the other hand, it reveals the non-dual nature of brahman.
 
The world is one that is born, lives and dies, and also it has a cause. In other words, it itself is an effect. It is incomplete since it is moving towards its goal. It is the object of the "this"-notion, it is disconnected, it has difference at its root, illuminated by another, and is the form of an experience. In constrast, brahman is complete, without any goal. It is the witness of the I-notion, non-disconnected and non-distinct nature (abheda svaroopa), self illumined and the illuminator of all experiences.
 
Brahman is the existence-consciousness-bliss non-dual entity. The imperishable non-negated reality is called existence. That which is the non-dual knowledge-nature reality at the root of all knowing, all thought-flow is consciousness. And that which is the flow of all joys, the ocean of all drops of happiness is bliss. All these three realities are one not three - this is the meaning of non-dual. In other words, that which is existence is consciousness, which is consciousness is existence. That which is existence-consciousness is bliss and that which is bliss is in the form of existence and consciousness.
 
Now, what do we see in this world? Activities, sights and enjoyments. Think and you will realize that the attainment of activity is existence, attainment of sight is consciousness, attainment of enjoyment is bliss. The doer alone will accomplish the activity, the knower alone will accomplish the sight, the enjoyer alone will accomplish the enjoyed. In this manner, there is a duality in doer-action, seer-seen and enjoyer-enjoyed. And with these, there is also the duality of cause-effect and Ishvara-world. To shake up this entire duality-world, that brahman element which is embedded in all of these yet is free from these, should be realized.
 
When we discriminate between the doer and action, we will attain the individual soul which is distinct from merit-sin and the body, as well as Ishvara. But the fundamental supreme soil is untouched by the difference of doer-action. We will attain two doers : the minor doer soul, and the omniscient all-powerful Ishvara. Through this discrimination, we will also understand that the doer is eternal, and action along with its instruments and result is temporary. With this discrimination, our interest and devotion towards the great doer Ishvara increases.
 
When we discriminate between cause and effect, then we will know that the effect is temporary and the cause is eternal. But, the cause is not called brahman. Causality is ascribed upon brahman. Both cause and effect are indicators of brahman. In the infinite reality, cause and effect are seen as two moons in the sky, in the form of errors (vivarta). There is both awareness and bliss in reality. But, if we were to think only along the lines of reality, then both cause and effect are the erroneous experiences of the same reality. And, the body and its materials, both are errors of the brahman reality - this will be experiences.
 
Cause-effect discrimination happens with the dominance of reality. Seer-seen discrimination happens with the dominance of awareness. Instrument-specific awareness is the doer, and thought-flow-specific awareness is the aware knower. The discrimination of subject and object along with thought flow is the discrimination of knower-known. And discrimination of knower-known without thought flow is the discrimination of seer-seen. In this, the seer of the waking state is the same seer of the dream and deep sleep states. There is no thought flow in deep sleep. Therefore, the witness is the seer of the thought-flow-less deep sleep. The witness of the deep sleep is the anvil-like witness alone, he alone is the soul witness, and also the Ishvara-witness. Through the great statements, this witness alone is experienced in its brahman form.
 
In the cause-effect notion, the cause is seen as a transformation (parinaama). In other words, Ishvara is being attained to the effect-formed transformation. But, in the seer-seen discrimination, the seer is unattached, this is known. In the cause-effect discrimination, the soul is the doer and Ishvara gives the results of action, this is proven. Whereas the seer is the non-doer, unattached, this is experienced.
 
Enjoyer-enjoyed discrimination happens with the dominance of bliss. This is the discrimination of dearness (priyataa). In reality, the self is dear, it is our own, but by placing our dearness into another, and then becoming happy on seeing it, this is enjoyership. Here is its discrimination. No object is dear for its own sake, it is dear for the sake of the self, per Yaajnyavalkya (Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad 2.4.5). The result of enjoyer-enjoyed discrimination is weakening of attraction and dawning of dispassion.
 
Just like cause and effect are errors of the existence aspect of brahman, the seer and the seen are the errors of its awareness aspect, similarly enjoyer-enjoyed are the errors of its bliss aspect.
 
Now, connect these different discriminations. Merge the cause and seer, and also, merge the effect and seen. What does it mean? If the aware seer alone is the reality of the cause, then by transformation of the cause, the effect will not become the seen. In fact, the seer in an erroneous form alone will be experienced as the seen. Also, the unattached nature of the seer and non-disconnectedness will remain intact. In other words, the seer will remain an essence (tattva), and the seen will become a non-essence counter experience. Then, disconnectedness and perishability of the seen will become negated or illusory. This is the result of oneness of existence and awareness.
 
The relationship of enjoyer-enjoyed is direct identification-rooted. It is a superimposition. When something is another, but becomes one with you, that is identification. By discrimination of enjoyer-enjoyed, the dearness which was accepted as another, returns to its real refuge, the inner self. Then, that which was the existence-aware seer, is now proven as the form of bliss also. Bliss does not happen without knowledge (for the reality of knowledge, it has to be experienced), nor does knowledge happen without reality, nor does reality happen without knowledge. That is why, there can be no distinction between existence, consciousness and bliss. Therefore, existence-consciousness-bliss is one element.
 
Once cannot separate awareness from oneself. You are awareness yourself. Everything is illumined through your "I" alone. That is why the Upanishads say that the supreme self is hidden in the cave of your "I" (Kathopanishad 1.2.12). Besides you, there is no other awareness or experience. If something is experienced, you will only experience it! Space, time, object, Ishvara, Vedas, teacher, scritupre, who will these be experienced (bhaasanaa) by? You. Who is this contained of all knowledge? It is you. You are not any ordinary reality. By accepting yourself as a man, woman, you should not bring any notion of inferiority. Similarly, by accepting yourself as smart, dumb etc., you should not go counter to your nature. Man and woman are in the effect, not in the cause. Smartness and dumbness are in the thought-flow, not in the seer. Similarly, enjoyed-enjoyer are also scenes, the seer is neither enjoyer nor enjoyed. He is one bliss, it is not in the enjoyer, nor in the enjoyed.
 
This subject which is eternal, the aware seer, is the substratum brahman alone. It is the cause of all causes (transcends cause and effect). All objects are impermanent and inert, therefore they are illusory. Then what else exists? Everything becomes brahman. Neither did the world get created, nor did the soul arise. To understand the unborn brahman, the method of the erroneous world has been placed in Vedanta.
 
Ascribing causality upon brahman is a tactic to understand brahman. Casuality is a logical process. It is used to refute all possible theories of creation (some of which were explained earlier) with the single statement that the world has come from brahman. Also, since brahman is aware and non-dual, it was also revealed that there is no cause-effect relation between creation and brahman. It is perceived as brahman due to ignorance of brahman. Then why do we join creation causality with brahman at all? Not for showing brahman as the cause, but to show its non-duality. The cause of an illusory effect is also illusory. Can the fact that the rope is the basis of the illusory snake be considered real? No. Similarly, the basis of the illusory causality, the disconnected substratum, does not have cause or effect distinct from it.
 
When the effect is proven to be illusory, with regards to that substratum on which causality was ascribed, the non-duality of that substratum is established. That there is no effect of that brahman, is the shruti of the Shvetaashvatara. The world is seen, cause-effect is also known in transactions. That is why creation causality has been ascribed upon the supreme self. Causality is the indicator-only of the non-duality of brahman. When the non-duality is realized, the causality-formed indicator is also taken back (Taittireeya Upanishad 2.7).

15.2 Various Opinions On The Origins Of Creation

In connection with the world and its creation, various scholars have presented many and varying opinions.
 
1. One opinion says that the world remains the same at all time, and it does not undergo creation and destruction. From the beginning of time, the world is running as it is now, and will continue to do so in the future. The same earth, the same sun, the same moon, the same men and women, and the same process of their creation. For them, there is no question about the birth etc. of this world. All curiosity is wiped out. Why is there need to investigate when the world always remains the same? This opinion is firmly unacceptable to the Upanishads, since they prompt us to investigate the world's cause.
 
2. One opinion says that there are four aspects to the material cause of the world: earth, water, fire and wind. There is no intelligent cause of this world. There is matter which is inert, but no knowledge. Knowledge arises from matter alone. This is the materialistic or Chaaravaaka school. But this opinion is also not supported by the Upanishads. Brahman cannot be four. All these four causes will be incomplete and disconnected, whereas the brahman of the Upanishads is non-disconnected and complete.
 
3. The Jains also believe that the world always stays as it is. From this, some soul breaks out of the cycle and the world, without beginning and end, continues as it is. Here also, there is no intelligent cause in the form of Ishvara or brahman.
 
4. The Buddhists say that this world is science only (vijnyaana maatra), it did not created not get destroyed. The void (shoonya) alone is real. Here, the material cause of the world is either science or nothing at all.
 
5. Poora Mimaamsaa also says that the world is always as it is. In their opinion, there is no question with regards to when, who, where, how the world was created. They also do not accept any intelligent cause such as Ishvara.
 
6. The Nyaya school and the Vaisheshika school do accept birth but accept it as atom-created. Therefore they are also not in line with Upanishads.
 
7. The Saankhya school accept the transforming Prakriti as the cause of the world, therefore they too are not in line with the Upanishads.
 
8. Islam accepts Ishvara as the creator of the world, but does not accept the dissolution of the world. After the day of final judgement, heaven and hell continue to exist where souls live. Christianity also accepts a similar viewpoint. Therefore, Islam and Christianity also do not follow the Upanishads. Upanishads accept the dissolution of the world.
 
In this manner, in the afore mentioned opinions, there is non-acceptance of either the creation, or of dissolution, sustenance, creation-sustenance-dissolution from Ishvara or brahman. All these do not follow the Upanishadic viewpoint.
 
Now let us look at these from a different angle.
 
Void Philosophers (Shoonya Vaadi) do not accept either the material or the intelligent cause of the world. Substratum-less, observation-less, creation-less, yet experienced, this is the state of the world, is their opinion.
 
Science Philosophers (Vijnyaana Vaadi) say that the fragmented flowing nature of the mind is the cause of the impression flow (sanskaara dhaaraa). There is no intelligent cause or awareness of this world, and there is no aware or inert material cause of this world. Whatever exists is mind-impression-flow. For them, the mind is the material cause.
 
Material Cause Philosophers (Upaadaana Vaadi) are of two types : Internal material cause proponents and external material cause proponents. Chaaravaakaas are external material cause supporters since they accept four external material causes. They are not intelligent cause proponents since they do not believe in Ishvara. The Nyaaya school also falls into external material cause philosophy since they consider the atom as the material cause. Also, they are intelligent cause philosophers since they consider Ishvara to be the intelligent cause of the world. The natural Saankhya school supports internal material cause philosophy, since they Prakriti is in the intellect hence it is internal, and external to the seer. The Poorva Mimaamsaa or the action-impression school is also supporting the internal material cause philosophy since the impression of action stays in the mind. The science school (vijnyaana vaadi) is also internal material cause oriented, since they consider the mind as the material cause. The Ishvara school is also an internal material cause oriented school.
 
In the Vedanta philosophy, if there is any intelligent or material cause of the world, then it is brahman alone, and that too is known in brahman by maayaa alone. So long as we do not recognize brahman, till then, both the intelligent and material causes remain (inferentially). But, when brahman is recognized as non-different from the inner consciousness, there is neither an intelligent cause nor a material cause. Causality itself is negated since there is nothing else but brahman.
 
The world, already created, is visible in front of us. Now, scripture connects it to its origins. That someone created the world (intelligent cause), this opinion is called "aarambha vaada". That the world emerged, this opinion is called "parinaama vaada". It was neither created, nor emerged, and does not exist, there is only brahman, but is visible in the form of the world, this is "vivarta vaada". The Nyaaya and Vaisheshika schools are "aarambha vaada", Saankhya is "Prakriti parinaama vaada", Buddhist school is "mind parinaamaa vaada and shoonya parnaama vaada". The Vishishitaadvaita school is "brahman parinaama vaada". Vedanta is "vivirta vaada".
 
In this manner, there are several philosophical opinions about the creation of the world. But the shruti does not paint itself into a corner. It does not aim to say that the birth etc. of the world "happens" from brahman. All kinds of perceptions are illumined by a self illumined self. They remain in that self and eventually dissolve into that self. That self is brahman.
 
This is what it aims to say : "All these beings are seen to get created, in which they are seen to remain alive, into which they seem to be going, and into which they are seen to eventually dissolve, these perceptions of space, time, object, change in object, creation-sustenance-destruction, by which all these are happening, that is brahman". In this meaning, that inner self which is the witness ("you" aspect indicated meaning), is the same as the defined cause of the world brahman (Ishvara).
 
The world. the space-time-objects of the world, the cause of the world Ishvara, the illuminator soul and their five differences, all these are known. In the language of Vedanta, these differences alone are appearance pervaded (bhaana vyaapya). Wherever here is a difference, there is an appearance. Where there is no appearance, there is no difference. There is no difference without appearance, but there is appearance without difference. There is appearance of absence of difference (bhedaabhaava). This means that difference will happen only when it is known. The knowing of difference alone is difference. But is difference true or false? Then difference is false since it is negated after knowledge of the substratum.
 
It could be accepted that there is existence of objects (padaartha) in deep sleep, but there is no difference in deep sleep. The difference in objects is absolutely mental, only an experience of the intellect, appearance only, visible only. Difference is not a real thing, it is an experience, a thought flow. It is neither aware nor inert. That by which the experience of creation, sustenance, destruction of all worldly objects happens, is brahman. By which is this experienced? By the witness, me. Then who is brahman? You (witness) are brahman (in other words, the purified "I" is brahman.

15.1 Indicative Definition Of Brahman (Tatastha Lakshana) : Cause Of Creation (Jagat Kaaranatva)

The first principle of Vedanta philosophy is : Now, begins the inquiry into brahman (athaato brahmajignyaasaa). In other words, he who is a four-fold-qualification-complete mumukshu, he who wants to permanently remove all sorrow and attain supreme bliss, should begin contemplation of brahman. The question is, what is the definition (lakshana) of the brahman mentioned here?
 
Brahman is non particular (nirvishesha) therefore it does not have a definition, this is the common view. Undefinable alone is its definition. But shruti gives its definition: That from which all these beings and entities are being created, after being created are living, towards which all these are headed, and that into which all of these merge in the end, develop curiosity towards that (Taittireeya Upanishad 3.1). Such a definition of brahman is available in abundance in the Upanishads. In the Vedanta philsophy, Bhagavaan Vyaasa has created a principle in regards to this : "Janmaadyasa Yataha" (Brahma Sootra 1.1.2). In other words, that from which the birth etc. of this creation happens, that is brahman.
 
When we accept brahman as the cause of creation, we may face an obstacle, which is that cause and effect both contain faults. The fault of the effect is its perishable nature, and that of the cause is that it is subject to modification. The seed becomes wet, it bursts, it opens up, then a sprout grows out, it bears fruits and flowers, and eventually dies. Then, how can the cause of creation become the definition of the imperishable and non modifiable anvil-like brahman? This obstacle is removed as follows. If we need to prove that brahman is the cause of creation, and therefore we present the afore-mentioned definition, then there is a fault. But that is not the case. The cause of creation as a definition of brahman is mentioned to prove the non-dual (ever non-differentiated in soul, world, Ishvara) nature of brahman.
 
Definition is that by which something is seen, something is known. Both definition and means enable us to recognize an object. A definition should be free from three faults - avyaapti, ativyaapti and asambhava. That definition which does not completely cover the defined entity has the fault of avyaapti or incompleteness. If someone says "that which does not have cloven hooves is a cow". But the hooves of a cow are cloven.
 
That definition which covers not just the defined object but some other object as well suffers from the fault of ativyaapti or stretching. If someone says "that which has horns is a cow", it is not precise enough.
 
That definition which does not cover its defined objects suffers from the fault of asambhava or impossibility. If someone says "a one hoof animal is a cow" it is incorrect since no cow has one hoof.
 
Another common fact about any definition is that the definition remains in the defined object alone. But this is not compulsory. Also, that a definition needs to be true also is not compulsory. For instance, imagine that person A sees a snake and person B who knows that it is not a snake but a rope. B says to A : "Please bring me that rope". A says to B : "This is a snake, which rope are you speaking about?". What will B say now? Won't he say : "My friend, the rope alone has become a snake. That from which the snake has been created, that in which the snake is situated and that into which the snake will dissolve, and that in which there is no snake in all three times, that is the rope. That which is the snake-absence-perceived (sarpaabhaavopalakshita) object, that alone is the rope." In this manner, the real rope becomes the definition of the illusory snake. It has entered into its defined object (rope) but it is not existing in the rope.
 
In this manner "that from which the birth etc. of creation happens is brahman alone", this is the definition of brahman. It is a particular and illusory definition in order to reveal the non particular and real brahman. In the true nature of brahman, there is no situation like birth of creation etc. Also, the defined object, which is the Ishvara-nature (causal nature) of brahman, is also depicted in order to define the no particular nature of brahman alone.
 
Question: If birth and other definitions are not established in brahman, then it will become a fault of incompleteness, since according to Vedanta philosophy, birth etc. happen to the world, not to brahman.
 
Answer: This is not a fault. There are two types of definitions : direct and indirect (svaroopa and tatashta lakshana). In the "shaakha chandra nyaaya", the moon in shown by saying "the moon is two hand lengths above the branch of the tree". Then, is the moon really two hand lengths above the tree? No, but by this imagined definition, the moon can be seen. In this manner, even if it does not cover the moon directly, two hand lengths can define the moon indirectly. And if we say "the brightest star in the sky that is round in shape is the moon", this will become the direct definition of the moon. Similarly, the presence and absence of the snake, necklace etc. becomes the indirect definition of the rope.
 
This "cause of the birth etc. of the world" is the indirect definition of brahman, not the direct definition. That is why, even if it is based on another, it is capable of revealing the object of its definition, brahman.
 
There are some objects that are proven by delusion. Even those illusory objects cane become revealers of their substratum. This is because no illusion can exist without a substratum. This is the reason why shruti describes the cause of birth etc. as an indirect definition of brahman.
 
That which needs to be present in the adjoining prior moment in time for the production of the effect is known as the cause (kaarana). This is the definition of the Nyaaya school. Prior to the making of a pot, we need clay, a potter, a wheel, a rod etc. Therefore they are the causes of the pot. Now divide these causes into two: required (samavaayee kaarana) cause and incidental (asamavaayee kaarana) cause. Required means that which is always embedded in the effect, stay in the effect even after the effect is created. Incidental cause is that which does not remain in the effect after the effect is produced. In this manner, the required cause of the pot is clay, and the incidental causes are potter, wheel, rod etc. Vedantic people refer to the required cause as the material cause (upaadaana kaarana).
 
We can again divide the incidental causes into two: instrumental cause (nimitta kaarana) and assisting cause (sahakaaree kaarana). The instrumental cause is aware, like the potter, he is a doer. And those causes which are used by the doer to assist him are the assisting causes like rod, wheel etc. In each effect, the presence of a material cause and an intelligent cause are mandatory.
 
The shruti says: That from which the world is created, on which it is situated, and into which it will dissolve, that cause is brahman. By being the cause of its creation, brahman is the intelligent cause of the world, and by being the substratum of its dissolution, it is the material cause of the world. The pot always gets dissolved into clay, not into the potter. Therefore, brahman is the non-distinct intelligent material cause of the world (abhinna nimittopaadana kaarana). That which is only the intelligent or material cause of the world cannot be brahman. All philosophies accept brahman as the intelligent cause, but not as the material cause. But the Upanishads assert that by the knowledge of one, everything will be known. They give examples such as pot, cup etc. This is only possible when even the material cause of the world is brahman. That is why, even the principles of Vedanta have asserted that even Prakriti is one name of brahman (Brahma Sootra 1.4.23).
 
Definition is always made by a known entity, and it is used to recognize an unknown entity. This world is known, and we have to use it alone to recognize the unknown brahman. In other words, we have to use the effect to recognize the cause.
 
The Nyaaya school accepts that the cause can be inferred from its effect. In their opinion, the material cause remains visible. It is always embedded in its effect. For example, we do not infer clay from looking at a pot since clay is visible. In fact, we infer that there has to be someone who created this pot. In this manner, there is a definitely a creator of this vivid and variegated world, and that intelligent cause is Ishvara, this can be inferred.
 
In the opinion of Saankhya, by seeing the effect, the material cause (Prakriti) can be inferred. The Prakriti as described by Saankhya can never be visible. By seeing an object (vastu), the five elements, ego, mahat element, and the unmanifest Prakriti, in this sequence, the root material cause Prakriti is inferred.
 
If both the material cause and intelligent cause are different, then the afore mentioned case holds. But when there is a non distinct intelligent material cause, like of brahman, then what is the outcome? There is no example available in the world where both the intelligent and material causes are one. The example of the spider web is also not correct since the aware aspect of the spider is the intelligent cause, and the inert aspect is the material cause. Then, how can the non distinct intelligent material cause of the world be used as a definition for brahman?
 
In reality, there is no causality in brahman, but it is visible in brahman due to maayaa. Sitting in which place, which time and in which matter is brahman becoming the cause of the world? How exactly is this causality of the world? Otherwise, anyone's intellect cannot enter into the beginningless past and endless future to witness the birth or death of the universe. Who has seen the creation come out of brahman or dissolve into brahman? That is why, when the Upanishad describes brahman as the birth etc. of the world, its secret has to be understood with a teacher-teaching-refined intellect.
 
This notion of direction - east, west, north, south, where did these directions originate? From me, from my body. What faces front of my body, what is behind me, to the left or right of me, this alone is the notion of direction.
 
Where does time begin - from this second. The start and end of the current second is the start and end of time. That me in which this present second is experienced, that "I" alone am the substratum of the start and end of time. The beginninglessness and endlessness of time is me alone.
 
This flower exists. Where did this arise from? It was born in the tree, this is the common thought. The other thought is : The perception of the flower happens in the eyes, the eye form thought flow is in the heart, and there is a substratum and illuminator of that thought flow. That is where the flower is born, has arisen. That without which the flower cannot be attained, and that by which this flower is attained, that alone is the cause of the flower.
 
In the search for the cause, do not spread your thought too much. Why do you throw your thought millions of years into the past? You are an extremely ancient ancestor! Why do you through your thought millions of years into the future? You are extremely impractical! You should develop your thinking in this manner. Think of the object in terms of what it is right now. Then, to begin with, your "I" comes in front. Now begin to think, what is this "I"? When you examine this, you will realize that this very "I", which is situated in the cave of the heart and is pulsating as the "I", "I" is the very brahman, and in reality, it is the non distinct intelligent material cause of creation. It is that very "I", which due to ignorance, is pulsating in the form of "I-you-that-this". Just like the same rope due to ignorance pulsates as a necklace, arm, stick, crack etc. which are all erroneous.
 
There is a person who sees a snake in the rope. In order to give him knowledge of the rope, you have to tell him this definition of the rope : "That substratum in which this imagined object in the form of the snake is appearing, that alone is the rope". Similarly, "This name-form-endowed complete world, along with its creation, maintenance and destruction, is appearing in a substratum which is devoid of name form etc. That alone is brahman", such a definition of brahman has to be described.
 
In the absolute sense, there is no snake on the rope. But it appears on the rope due to ignorance. Therefore, the ignorance of the rope alone is both the intelligent cause and material cause of the snake's existence. In that state of ignorance, in order to point out the rope, the rope can be denoted as the cause of the snake. When knowledge of the rope happens, the causality of the rope in the snake, which is ascribed, can also be negated. Similarly, the shruti has revealed a definition of brahman which is ascribed in the form of world causality.
 
Therefore, the world is of the nature of name and form, contains many doers and enjoyers, is the refuge of activity and result of activity caused by time and space, and its creation and nature is unthinkable by the mind. That omniscient, omnipotent cause by which such a word is created, maintained and destroyed, that is brahman.
 
Whatever is "this"-denoted, that is the world. Its definition is creation, maintenance and destruction. This-denoted means the world is an object of perception. Therefore, the shruti and principles say that this object of this-perception, the seen-world, and its visible creation, maintenance and destruction, these visible creation etc. are happening due to a cause, which is brahman.
 
The creation-destruction of the entire universe cannot become an object of experience. Therefore, the goal of the shruti is not to take you into the beginningless past and the endless future. Its aim is the following. In this moment, in each space, in each object, that non-stop birth, maintenance and destruction which is perceived by you, that by which this perception is happening, that is brahman.
 
This means that whatever is being perceived as the this-formed entity which undergoes birth etc., that in which this happens and by which this happens, is the brahman, non distinct from the inner self.
 
Now, that by which the birth, maintenance and death of the "this" is known, that brahman itself is free from creation-maintenance-destruction and is devoid of this-ness. Therefore brahman is aware, non distinct than the inner self, and is an infinite entity. Through this, another afore mentioned definition of brahman also arises.
 
This is the aim of the shruti: That which is different from the seen, that in which there is no seen, in that, the seen is being perceived. Therefore, by being perceived in the contained of its absence, the seen is illusory. The "this", along with its transformations of birth etc., is illusory.
 
The "this" is many, but the non-this is one. In that one, many are appearing. Therefore many-ness is illusory. That which is "this" is inert, the "I" which is the illuminator of the "this" is aware. There is no inert in the aware, but appears, therefore, the inert in the aware is illusory. In the same manner, finitude appears in the infinite, and therefore finitude (disconnectness) is illusory. Since the not-self appears in the self, the not-self (seen, this) is illusory.
 
Even the shruti "yato vaa imaani" says : "That by which the creation, sustenance and dissolution of objects seems to be appearing, but in which these are not, in other words, in which these are illusory visible, that is brahman. That alone should be made the target of curiosity".
 
Brahman is that by which the "this"-like visible world appear to be created etc. Therefore brahman is real. Brahman is that by which the "this"-denoted entire seen world, along with its birth etc., appears. Therefore brahman is aware. Brahman is that by which all beings are satisfied therefore brahman is bliss. Brahman is that by which the world is created-sustained-destroyed, therefore brahman is the non distinct intelligent material cause of the world, like the rope-snake. That is why it is the non distinct non dual. The world is always merged into brahman which means falsified, because brahman remains intact even after the world merges into it. Therefore, the nature of brahman is "existence-consciousness-bliss non-dual".
 
The next shruti of the Taittireeya Upanishad says that "bliss is brahman alone, know this. Truly, all these beings are created from bliss alone, live due to bliss, are satisfied with bliss alone, and are merged into bliss alone" (Taittireeya Upanishad 3.6). Therefore, "yato vaa imaani" named shruti refers to this very same bliss-brahman. No matter how bliss is, it always is based in the self. Therefore, brahman is always non distinct from the inner self.
 
That which is beyond birth, non-transforming, different than the "this"-ness, non distinct from the inner awareness "I", of the nature of reality, bliss-formed, undivided non-dual existence, in which this world is appearing, and even while appearing is not real, that is brahman.

15.0 Contemplation Of The Ishvara Entity (Ishvaratattva Ka Vichaara)

14.3 The Pure Nature Of The Soul : Undivided Existence-Consciousness-Bliss (Jeeva Ka Shuddha Svaroopa : Akhanda Sacchidaananda)

The soul-only wants happiness - and such a happiness that is obtained everywhere, at all times, and from all, for which one does not have to put in effort, that which is not dependent, and that which is always experienced.
 
Even after harbouring a hope of such high standards, it is a strange matter that there is no consensus on the means for obtaining it. Some believe that you gain happiness if you visit a particular place. Others believe that you become happy if you create a particular situation. Some are striving for gaining objects, some others are engaged in the task of world welfare. Someone is begging for happiness from another, with joined hands, while someone else is blindly trying one thing after another. Many souls, many ideas, many opinions. It is like there is cannabis in the well. Should we enjoy or should we remain stable for happiness? Should we remember something or forget everything? Should we remain conscious or become unconscious? The reason for all this difference of opinion is as follows. We have not ascertained the nature of the happiness we all desire. That is why we engage in temporary, incomplete, action-oriented and subservient joys, and in the process, get fatigue and stress instead of peace!
 
In the limited space, time, object, person, effort, thought flow, ego of the enjoyer, you cannot obtain limitless happiness. Effort cannot be infinite, since the reaction to effort is rest, whether it is sleep or samaadhi! That which you are understanding as your dear happiness, test it with these parameters: Is it now? Is it here? Is it this? Is it readily accessible? Is it non dependent? It is experienced at all times? That happiness which is now, here, this, readily accessible, non dependent, experienced at all times, it is direct immediate but due to a mistake it is not recognized. Due to that, we require and wait for effort, situation and dependency. This is the play of an intellectual absurdity, improper thought and delusion. For the attainment of dear happiness, all this should be removed.
 
Fundamentally, we want experiential happiness since there is no visible reality of happiness. Whenever happiness happens, it is always direct immediate. Not the direct immediate behaviour of means and knowledge, but the direct immediacy of witnessed experience. The witness is happiness-nature itself, but due to ignorant thought flow (not knowing one's brahman-ness, it illumines happiness in the form of another. Due to this, it perceives the changes of situations, and accepts changes in happiness also. And it identifies with waking and other states, considering itself to be happy sometimes, and sad sometimes.
 
It is worth investigating whether we are really accepting a specific form of mental thought flow, with or without an object, as happiness! If that is so, then that specific form will be adjuncted, temporal, spatial. That is why, the attainment of happiness through a specific form will be proven to be a delusion.
 
In the vision of the essence, happiness is the experience-only of brahman. Due to the temporary nature of transactional happiness, brahman cannot be temporary, since temporality is the object of perception (upalabdhi), and happiness is of the nature of perception (upalabdhi svaroopa), timeless, spaceless and objectless. This means that perception alone is brahman, and brahman is the imperishable reality, the illuminator of all, complete, aware, the most dear in life, and happiness-nature pure knowledge (prajnyaana) alone. In which time, place, state, form, action or without action, given or not given, conscious or unconscious, whichever form or its absence is perceived, there is no purpose of any of these of that pure knowledge-nature happiness. All those perceptions are not different than the pure knowledge-alone, neither are they its modifications. Due to the opposite behaviour (vartana) of pure knowledge from its essential form, they can be called errors (vivarta) but from the absolute standpoint, all those forms of pure knowledge are brahman-nature alone.
 
What is prajnyaana? It is pure knowledge. In daily usage, the word knowledge is used in connection with the sense of knower and known. The trifecta of knower, known and knowledge is always present in worldly transactions. There is no knowledge in the world that does not have some object or the other, and does not have some arrogator or another. In reality, one knowledge is acting as three forms of knower, known and knowledge. Even so, without the knowledge of non-duality, there is no illusoriness of duality, and the alone-ness (kevalataa) of knowledge remains veiled. In the state of ignorance, this appearing trifecta is an impurity ascribed upon knowledge. For rejection of this impurity, the pure nature of knowledge, pure knowledge, needs to be defined. Fundamentally, knowledge does not require a known since knowledge illuminates the absence of a known also. Absence is an entity not different than the substratum. The difference exists only till there is ignorance of the substratum. The known and the knower require each other. Knowledge does not require even a knower, since knowledge can illumine even the absence of knower-ness (jnyaatritva). Knowledge and knowledge also do not require each other since knowledge is only one. That is why, known-ness and its absence, knower-ness and its absence, non-disconnected than all of these, complete within thee, their substratum and their illuminator is a self illumined knowledge. It does not require anything. It is the illuminator of difference-alone, it is the substratum. That is why, the nature of pure knowledge is devoid of the difference of knower and known.
 
Here, "known" means scene-only and "knower" means both soul and Ishvara. That is why, devoid of the difference between world, soul and Ishvara, self illumined and self only substratum, iluminator of the unreal duality and light-ness devoid light is the non-dual brahman alone. This ignorance does not require anything since it is the illuminator of ignorance also. Ignorance is real-unreal-different indescribable and is imagined in a veiled form in the substratum. There cannot be a requirement of an imagined entity in the self illumined knowledge. Any product that requires another is illusory and that which does not is real. This very non-requiring reality is brahman. It is called pure knowledge in the Upanishads.
 
The necklace is known, eyes are the instruments of knowledge and the eye-owner "I" is the knower. The truth is that the disconnected knower has an aware substratum. It is also the substratum of the known and of the eyes. But, since that non-disconnected substratum is not imbibed, it appears in the three forms of knower, knowledge and known. On gaining knowledge of the non-disconnectedness, the appearance-only-ness of the three is destroyed. That is why, the pure knowledge in the form of awareness of the substratum is the truth, and the trifecta is experienced as an illusion. Many knowns, many instruments of knowledge and many arrogators, all of these are the reverse cognitions (vivartas) of that one non-disconnected pure knowledge alone. Not knowing the undivided nature of pure knowledge is ignorance. Knowing oneself and objects as fragments is a delusion. For the removal of this delusion, the investigation of the pure knowledge entity is useful.
 
What are these trifectas in the pure knowledge awareness? Definitely, these are reflections of awareness (chidaabhaasa). Since there is no other illuminator for illuminating the self-illumined awareness, and since it is unfit to illumine its own non-disconnectedness and awareness, it is illumining itself in a form thats opposite to itself. Like the immeasurable nature of the sky cannot be illumined by the eyes. Then in the form of blueness, as with-form opposed to without-form, the sky appears. Similarly, our inner self alone, being without object, is seen as an external object. Aware in the form of inert, imperishable in the form of perishable, complete in the form of disconnected, non-dual in the form of duality, the self as another, all these appear. Whoever seeks to make pure knowledge into an object, will have to make pure knowledge into the form of inert or disconnected. That is why, it will not be pure knowledge anymore, it will be the reverse cognition of pure knowledge. Therefore, the shruti advises that the investigation of pure knowledge occur in the form of a seeker, not in the form of another: You alone are the pure knowledge brahman. The witness alone is pure knowledge. Through it, the form of result of any action, worship, yoga, or the form of any object of sense, or itself alone in an appearing form, pure knowledge cannot be realized. All means are satisfied once they reveal their respective errors (vyaavartya kee vyaavritti). So much so that even the knowledge arising from the great statements also, after having removed ignorance, itself is removed or falsified, and only the prior pure knowledge alone remains.
 
We can say that pure knowledge is pervaded in the trifecta of knower-knowledge-known. But the notion of pervader-pervaded is imagined in pure knowledge. The Tejo (Bindu) Upanishad clearly says that pervader-pervaded is illusory. For instance, past, future, present is pervaded by time, but there is no entity called past, present and future independent of time. Then how can something be pervaded by something else? Fundamentally, having accepted chronology, these three states have been imagined in time. The substratum of this trifecta which is time, and the illuminator which is awareness, have no awareness of this trifecta. It is a play of the human mind alone, or in technical terms, is superimposed. Similarly, the knower-known-knowledge trifecta is just a play of the intellect, and the pervasion of pure knowledge in that is also a play of the intellect. Separate from pure knowledge, there is no real trifecta. Then who is pervading whom? In the division-devoid directions, the divisions of up-down, north-south, east-west are always imagined. By the abstraction of direction, in the adjuncted awareness or in its substratum, the reality, the division of direction is irrelevant. Even then, object-oriented divisions such as length, width, height, inner-outer etc. of a pot or a house, all these imaginations are placed on the head of direction as a concept. This is the superimposition of one thing upon another. Is there any pervader-pervaded relationship of directions on east, west etc.? There is never any connection of our true nature with any object, not even the relationship of identification. Can the full, the complete, ever have any relationship of identification with anything?
 
In one non-dual undivided reality, the division of space etc. is not time-rooted since it is not a modification, it is not movement-oriented since there is no space or action, and is not nature-rooted since the definition of one's nature cannot be applied to another. It is not name-form-rooted either, since they only occur during the time of the means-known transaction. The, just like the division of present etc. in time, like the division of west etc. in space, essentially, the five elements in the realm of brahman, and the names-forms imagined in them, are always illusory. To explain this very point, the examples of dream as well as of the snake on a rope, are given by shruti, scriptures and great people. Dream is used in the investigation of the "you" aspect, and snake-rope is used in the investigation of the "that" aspect, and essentially, in the realization of the oneness, no example is given. That is why, to explain the pervasion of the pure knowledge brahman, an appropriate statement is made with regards to the inner awareness. The substances of the dream state are appearing in that space and time when and where they are always unreal. Similarly, in the pure knowledge brahman, all trifectas along with their objects and differences are illusory, in other words, the visible world is always illusory in pure knowledge. Also, just like the visible snake is illusory during the time of its visibility, in the "that" aspect form undivided awareness reality, this visible world is appearing, but is illusory in all times. Once the illusory nature of the visible world becomes a firm conviction, nothing remains to create a division between the inner self and the substratum-awareness-form supreme self. Fundamentally, division alone is the world, and without existing, it is appearing in its inherent nature form pure knowledge brahman. In the pure knowledge brahman, pervasion and pervaded-ness, both are imagined from the standpoint of transactions, in the absolute sense, it is mere pervasion alone (vyaapti maatra).
 
In the contemplation of Vedanta, the pervasion of one thing into another is not called pervasion. The pervasion of fire into iron, and that of ghee into milk, these examples are not those of pervasion in reality. This is because their pervasion is separated either by space or action. The real pervasion is the presence of the material cause in its effect. That into which the effect merges after destruction, or that with which the effect is made, that in which the shape of the effect is embedded, that which is present in the form of mass in the effect, that is called the material cause. Like: clay in pot, water in wave, flame in spark, air in breath, great space in pot space, vision of dream seer in dream. Now, in the example of the pot and clay, it is not just clay that is the material cause, but the five great elements alone are the material cause. That is why the sound, touch, form, taste and smell - the five elements are present in all of these. The pot is non-separate from the five elements. Even after the pot breaks, the five elements exist. Similarly, wave, spark, breath etc. should be understood in the same connection. Dream vision is an example of material causation. Rope-snake is an example of an effect due to ignorance of the substratum. They also are not different than their material cause. All these examples are useful in understanding the pervasion of the pure knowledge brahman. However, fundamentally, its pervasion cannot be explained properly. This is because all these examples are in connection with either something that is a scene, or is inert. The pure knowledge brahman is aware. Wherever the aware is the material cause, there, fundamentally, it is devoid of the cause-effect distinction. That is why the pervasion of the aware is the non existence of any substance other than the aware. In other words, it is its fullness alone.
 
The cause-effect-form pervaded-pervaded notion is in the seen alone, not in its illuminator or its substratum, the aware. That is why the notion of spatial, temporal and particular transformation cannot be connected with the pure knowledge brahman. The pure knowledge brahman is the substratum and illuminator of the absence of space, time and cause-effect. Since space, time and objects, which are illumined by it, are the competitors (pratiyogee) of their substratum-based complete absence, they are illusory. By being a seen, transformational and disconnected also, they are not independent, imperishable and full. In this state, in order to attain the pure knowledge brahman, when, where, in which form and through which process should we investigate?
 
It is a wonder that we expect to wait for some time, state or situation for searching the pure knowledge brahman! No measure of time is devoid of this pure knowledge. It cannot ever imagine its death, change, absence or birth because pure knowledge is their witness and illuminator. Then why are we unable to attain this which is in the form of substratum and illuminator in each and every moment?
 
It is a wonder. Even though the pure knowledge is not in the least bit touched by the notion of space, though it is free from the triplet of inner, outer and intermediate space, thought the triplet is imagined on the substratum and illuminator, inner facing and outer facing etc., in these states of space, in situations as well as coming and going, minuteness, bigness, medium-ness etc., devoid of all of these, why is it not available now in this space, since it is the form of substratum and illumination of the disconnectedness of space, when it cannot ever ascribe incompleteness, disconnectedness form transformations? Pure knowledge is the witness aware-only entity of the imagination of presence and absence of space. In order to attain that which is full and attained by nature, why is there a need to requirement to enter a secret realm of intermediate space? Why cannot its perception and investigation happen in the current space?
 
It is a wonder. In this space, all forms, transformations, types, impressions are becoming the objects of experience. All these are becoming objects of the intellect, which is distinct from the very counter (vivartee) material cause awareness which is illuminating them, but they are non-distinct from it fundamentally. When, in fact, the imperishable, full, non-dual aware-existence is appearing in the form of everything, devoid of space and time. Isn't it a wonder?
 
That which has never experienced itself and endowed with the division of subject and object, for the attainment of that pure knowledge, what is the need for means-known-formed transaction? If pure knowledge was visible like pot etc., then a visible means of knowledge would become necessary. If it was invisible like the creator of the world, then there would be need for inference. And if there were something else like it, then it would be need to be compared and would be another due to ignorance, and therefore would need words to comprehend. If it were like joy sorrow etc. which are mental experiences, then it would have witness experience (saakshi bhaasyataa). But this all-substratum, all-experiencer, self-illumined, pure knowledge brahman is to be attained. Which instrument is needed or which new instrument has to be created to experience this? It never experiences anything as different than itself, and never becomes the object of someone else's experience. Which instrument is needed here?
 
Here is the biggest wonder of all. We always want to attain pure knowledge brahman in some time such as samaadhi, in some space such as the abode of Brahmaa, in some form which is the object of intellect. Space cannot be falsified through coming and going. Time cannot be falsified through counter thinking. Subject-object cannot be falsified through like thought flow (tad aakaara vritti). That is why, in the attainment of the pure knowledge brahman, all these methods cannot become immediate means. For that, the purified I-sense is supreme alone. Through this method, characteristics of time (death, change etc.), characteristics of space (inner outer etc.) and characteristics of objects (scene-ness etc.) are clearly perceived as different in the self. No one can ever experience the absence, inertness and lack of love of one's own self. That is why, to attain the happiness-nature pure knowledge brahman, spatial, temporal and object-oriented shapes of joy imagination and joy emotion are not needed. The investigation of the pure knowledge-nature self alone is one's duty.
 
What is this purified I-sense self? To do this, focus your attention on your I-sense as used in daily dealings. In other words, what is the entity that we refer to as our "I"? Our investigation should always begin with where we are, when we are and what we are, only then will it be successful. That is why, wherever there is arrogation of one sheath or another, of one state such as waking or another, wherever the "I" sense arises, we should investigate whether that is the real "I" or not. If the "I" is used in its impure sense, then either it will be visible in the form of "this", or invisible in the form of "that". Definitely, any usage along these lines reveals the impure form of the I-sense. And then we will not be able to recognize even our waking, dream and deep sleep states, since the self-nature is different than all these three. Prior to this, the discrimination of five sheaths has to be conducted. Then, the waking state of one body will not be our waking state, but in fact, after taking one step back, we will attain our self in the form of the arrogator of the entire waking state. With this state analysis, the contemplation of Vedanta begins, and by knowing the fourth-nature pure knowledge brahman as our own nature, we can be free of ignorance and its effects.
 
At this time, as we are investigating, researching and purifying the I-sense as humans, transacting with internal and external organs in our gross body, it is clearly experienced that this is the waking state. In this state, the person uses the term "I" to denote his body. He ascribes attributes such as tall-short, fair-dark, fat-thin upon himself and thinks of himself as the gross body. This person takes the actions performed by the organs of action in his body to be his own, and arrogates the notion that "I am the doer of merit and sin". Doer of action, doer of walking, doer of taking, this is the nature of arrogation. When he thinks of himself as the owner of organs of knowledge, he arrogates the notion that "I see, I hear, I taste". He thinks of himself as the doer, knower, enjoyer. He ascribes action and knowledge of the organs of action and knowledge upon himself, then he identifies with the good or bad results upon himself, and even though he is self sufficient, he thinks of himself as happy or sad. Ideas arise due to actions and knowledge, and actions happen according to those ideas. This cycle continues throughout life, becomes the cause of births upon births, and deaths upon deaths. If this state were real, then the doer-enjoyer soul will always remain worldly, and will never free himself from this cycle. This cycle of birth and death alone is called world, and the "I" which is trapped in this world is called the worldly soul.
 
We need to think about this : What in reality is the soul which is becoming a doer with the adjunct of organs of action, enjoyer with the adjunct of result thought flow and worldly with the adjunct of the imagination of birth and death? If in essence it was disconnected, then in the wordly flow of action, particular knowledge, joy and sorrow etc., its getting stuck would be a natural thing and there would be no point in striving for liberation. But, this disconnectedness has been accepted without any investigation, without any thought or experience. That is why, when something has been believed through blind tradition or thoughtless ignorance-rooted acceptance, it has to be destroyed through the knowledge of the essence. The knowledge of the essence is the knowledge of identity of the self and brahman. Without the knowledge of the identity between self and brahman, this will not be removed. That is why, the process of striving should be begun.

14.2 Seed (Beeja) And Individual Soul (Jeeva)

In this world, from Lord Brahmaa to a moth, there is no being that does not want to avoid sorrow, and does not make attempts to avoid it. Without teaching or learning, naturally, all have a distaste for death, ignorance and sorrow. If you contemplate on this, you realize that there is no question of freeing oneself from sorrow that has passed. That which is being experienced is already passing away. That which has yet to come is not known. Then what does freeing oneself from sorrow mean? The things that cause sorrow, freedom from those causes, freedom forever, complete freedom, freedom in all forms, in other words, the permanent cessation of sorrow. In this state, naturally this question arises : What is the cause of sorrow and how do we prevent it?
 
Sorrow arises along with the body alone. Sorrow is experienced in both birth and death. Disease, separation, enjoyment, meeting, favourable-unfavourable, all happen due to connection with the body alone. Independence-subservience also is enjoined with this. Rules of action, action, situation, state, all are children of the body. The connection with the body alone is the cause of sorrow.
 
And what is the connection? Accepting it in the form of I and mine. Perform discrimination on your true nature and understand yourself as different from the body : This body is not me, nor is it mine. Then, let whatever is being said about the body be said, let it be, whatever is happening, let it be, how it is happening, let it be, but it is neither me, nor mine. For I am the seer, witness, unattached, indifferent. Imbibing the body in the form of I and mine alone is the material cause of sorrow.
 
Where did this body come from? After casting away the me and mine. where will it go? After leaving its connection, what is the guarantee that such a connection will not happen again? Whether the body is created out of one element or out of many, the shaping or joining of elements cannot happen without injunctions and prohibitions, and injunctions and prohibitions cannot happen without action. Action happens with the body. Then the succession of the body progeny will never. Ordained and prohibited actions will continue to occur, just like they did in the past. Action from body, and body from action. Both of these, like tree and seed, are going on in succession since time immemorial. Then, is the life of an individual soul the life of the seed? No, there is a difference in both!
 
You have a seed in your hand. If you can recognize the tree from which this seed came, then once you see it, you can imagine its past form and future form. How this seed come through the roots, leaves, branches, buds and flowers, and now after sowing it, it will take on a form similar to its source tree. But all this is not seen in the seed, even though it is contained in the seed. The seed needs earth, water, heat, light, wind and space, as well as a field, manure and irrigation. It will become moist, it will sprout, it will burst, it will increase. It needs space, it needs time, Even after all this happens, it will express its shape, form and taste as per its nature. The seed has been transmitted in succession since time immemorial. Inside-outside, down-up, it attains to all these. It will keep going on until its seed-ness is destroyed through fire or other means.
 
Now, imagine that there is an (individual) soul in your hand. It has a particular type of soul-ness (jeevatva). It also needs time for its appearance and disappearance, space for its coming and going, matter for taking on various forms, and for all these actions, it requires connection with action (karma sambandha). Without action, rising-falling, living-dying or coming and going cannot happen. The same object cannot transform into various forms without action. These actions alone are known as modifications (vikaara) or vikriyaa in common language, which through a particular process, create a flow (dhaara) of shapes. These actions alone, by virtue of being performed with doership in this soul world, imbibe the form of particular desire-created (vaasanaajanya) impressions (sanskaaras). Because of this, they are called injunctions or prohibitions (dharma adharma).
 
The soul is due to predominance of awareness, and the seed due to that of inertness. The "va" in jeeva refers to its inwardness, and the "ba" in beeja refers to its outwardness. The seed is the cause of creation alone, but the soul is the cause of creation as well as perception (pramaana). The powers of the seed remain in physical matter alone. Those of the soul remain in physical and beyond physical. Both the internal and external organs of the soul remain aware, but the organs of the seed are dormant (moorchita). There is no genesis of injunction or prohibition in the seed (dharma adharma). But, since the soul is the basis of the perception thought flow (praamaana vritti) and is independent in performance of action, it becomes the basis of injunction and prohibition. The enjoyed-aspect of the seed is predominant, whereas the enjoyer-aspect of the soul is predominant. That is why the joy-sorrow of the soul is awake, and that of the seed is dormant. The soul attains higher or lower destinations due to its performed injunctions or prohibitions, and the seed attains its destinations by being helpless in the natural flow of Prakriti.
 
Even souls are downward-channel, horizontal-channel and upward-channel in the realm of Prakriti, of three types. By and large, the first two demonstrate a predominance of inertness, not the knowledge of right or wrong. But in the upward-channel (which is the human species), evolution has reached its pinnacle. In this, there is the full scope of action, knowledge and love to express. This is because, we see the evolution of hands and other organs for new actions, intellect for new inventions, and love for experiencing bliss. In this species, there is complete prowess for the experience of the real notion (sad bhaava), the awareness notion (chid bhaava) and the bliss notion. It imbibes the impressions of science (vidyaa) and action in its internal organ, and the arising of prior intelligence is also seen. That is why, the entire responsibility of prohibition and injunction is expressed in humans alone.
 
Prohibited behaviour weakens the command of the soul on the body, senses and mind. That it why, it again goes under the control of Prakriti and has to take birth as a human or some other lower species. Opposed to this, by behaviour as per injunctions, the body, senses and mind are purified, and their regulation is enhanced. When this happens, the soul becomes qualified to enter heavenly kingdoms. Even in these heavenly kingdoms, there is an excess of sense pleasures alone. But after worshipping one dear deity, there is manifestation of divine joy, which is different from sense pleasures. Due to the variety of deities, chantes and methods, there is many-ness also in results of joy of right actions (dharma sukha). When there is one deity, chant, method and faith in worship, there is manifestation of divine joy in emotion-dominant one-pointed thought flow.
 
The Saankhya-described witness-nature of the soul is the witness of the internal organ. But it is different in every body, it is unattached, and it is self-illumined awareness. The witness of the internal organ, the self-illumined awareness has no connection with space, time and matter. Due to restraint of thought flows, this seer gets established in its self-nature (aatma svaroopa). Then, it gets liberated from coming and going in space, birth and death in time, change of species in matter. By being unattached from adjuncts, at that time, this seer becomes established in its true nature. But, when the samaadhi breaks, it again takes the form (saaroopya) of the thought flow. That is why, through the controller (niyantaa) of the thought flows, the control and birth-death etc. of this is also possible.
 
Per Vedanta, the witness nature of the soul is brahman alone. Therefore, by investigating into the true nature of soul and brahman, that soul which experiences the oneness between both of them through the great statements of Vedanta as his self, for that soul, space-time-etc. become falsified or illusory once and for all. Then, there is permanent cessation of birth and death. Until there is reality given to thought flow and consequent identification to them, till then the reality of difference, many-ness of the seer and separateness from Ishvara cannot be deleted by anyone, and the flow of birth and death will continue..
 
Since seed-ness is physical, it is destroyed by physical fire. That is why it is without beginning. But since the soul is aware, it cannot be destroyed by physical fire. It has ignorance-rooted identification with the seed-impressions of desire at the root of thought flow. That is why, through the fire of knowledge, without the extinguishing of ignorance, the soul-ness of the soul cannot be removed.
 
The soul is aware, its life-existence is without beginning or end. It imbibes the imagination of space, time and matter into its vision. The appearance (bhaasamaanataa) of space, time and matter is falsified, and the inherent nature of the aware is ever non-falsified. In the course of experience, there is no non-existence. No one can experience "I am not". That is why, the authentic nature of soul is endless and non-dual. In its own imagination alone, it identifies with the appearing time and thinks of itself as timeless, it identifies with the appearing space and thinks of itself as pervasive, it identifies with the appearing matter and thinks of itself as the self of all. In reality, even timelessness, pervasiveness and all-self-ness is not the factual nature of the self, it is due to identification with the imagined scene. The substratum awareness alone is the factual nature of the soul, and there is not a trace of duality in it anywhere. There is no value for obstructed appearance (baadhita bhasamaanataa). Fundamentally, seed-ness and soul-ness are ignorance-oriented. Both the seed-reality and soul-reality are non-different than the undivided aware-only reality.
 
Now, let us again return to the earlier topic. What is the cause of variety in any object? Action or transformation. Transformation is due to Prakriti or is natural, but action is executed by the doer. Action remains intertwined with injunction and prohibition, since it has the wish of attainment or avoidance at its root. Due to the firmness or weakness of this wish, allowed or forbidden actions are performed. Superimposition has ignorance at its root. That is why until ignorance remains, superimposition will remain, and due to the non-removal of desires, the cycle of birth and death will also not cease. Vedanta knowledge is concerned with the removal of this cycle alone.
 
Assume the following were not to exist : birth and death due to predominance of time, coming and going due to predominance of space, change in species due to predominance of matter, result regulated by Ishvara, the bondage of the ignorant souls to experience these results. Then there would be no need for the knowledge derived for the "you are that" etc. great statements. The entire hearing, contemplation and meditation of Vedanta would be useless. The need for identity of self and brahman is for its cessation alone.
 
"So long as there is insistence on the cause and result, there is the expanse of the universe. On the weakening of the frenzy of cause and result, the wise person does not acquire the universe." (Maandookya Kaarika 4.56).
 
When the self is not accepted as brahman (without the division of space-time-matter, inter-intra-part-whole-difference devoid) and it is accepted that I am the doer of right and wrong, and the enjoyer of its resulting joy and sorrow, then the intellect becomes that of worldly birth and death. When, with the knowledge of the identity of self and brahman, the ignorance-rooted doership, enjoyership, worldliness, disconnectedness etc. are falsified, then the disastrous world with birth-death, coming-going etc. is removed. That is why, prior to the knowledge of the essence, rebirth and other realms need to be accepted. Otherwise, one turns against Vedanta science and gets stuck in massive misfortune.
 
The life of the soul is an undivided aware-only reality. This is the opinion of Vedanta and is logically sound. The delusion of difference is caused by ignorance alone [duality on an LCD screen is fake]. Difference alone is appearance only (praatibhasika). Difference is not real in essence and not different than its self illumined substratum, the self.