Printed book of this blog - The Vedanta Primer (adapted from Vedanta Bodha of Akhandananda Saraswati) - is available on Amazon

The Vedanta Primer : Adapted from the Vedanta Bodha of Akhandananda Saraswati

19.4 Body-free Liberation (Videha Mukti)

Once, I asked Shree Udiyaabaabaajee Maharaaj - "What is the difference between living and body-free liberation?" He instantly replied - "In your true nature, the discussion of their distinction itself is inauspicious".
 
The reality is that the self is of the nature of non-distinction, and the self indicated by the removal of ignorance is called liberation. Therefore in liberation, the distinction of living and body-free is inappropriate. Even in this, in that internal organ that has been illumined by the light of the knowledge of the self, the various degrees of knowledge based on the proportions of devotion, faith and meditation have been described in the Vedantic scriptures. The person who is liberated even though the body and body notion persists is called "liberated living person". The person with a body who is liberated but whose body notion has dropped is called "body-free liberated person". After the body goes, no personality of the liberated person remains, therefore, there is no state of birth or death after that. He does not again come back (Chhaandogya Upanishad 8.15.1).
His vital breath does not depart (Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad 4.4.6).
Those who, having faith in the great statement "I am brahman" perform "agam graha upaasanaa", but that worship does not transform into the knowledge of brahman in this life, then after death, their vital breath departs, and those people attain the realm of Brahmaa by going through the Uttaraayana path (light or sun). There, they are instructed by Lord Brahmaa and become liberated wit him. This is called "krama mukti" or sequential liberation in the scripture.
 
Similarly, those who are on the path of either desire-prompted action, or desire-less action/deity-worship, they respectively travel the path of Dakshinaayana and Uttaraayana, attain their desired realms, enjoy the results of their mental desires, and again attain this world of death. In the eight chapter of the Gita, the fifth chapter of the Chhaandogya, and the fourth chapter of the Brihadaaranyaka, this has been described. More details can be found there.
 
The philosophy of the shruti is that the knower of brahman alone is brahman (Mundaka Upanishad 3.2.9). Only by becoming brahman do you attain brahman (Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad 4.4.6). Therefore, the knower of brahman is liberated at the time of knowledge. He who revels in the self, who sports in the self, who transacts in the self, that knower of brahman is supreme (Mundaka Upanishad 3.1.5). By taking the basis of this shruti, seven degrees of knowledge have been described in the Yoga Vaasishtha. For the readers' benefit, they have been listed here.
 
There are seven degrees - shubhecchaa, vichaaranaa, tanumaanasaa, sattvapatti, asamsakti, padaarthabhavaanee and turyagaa. Shubhecchaa is faith oriented. Vichaaranaa is faith and devotion oriented. Tanumanasaa is meditation oriented. Sattvapatti is devotion and meditation oriented. Asamsakti is non-attachment oriented. In Padaarthabhavaanee, in the thought flow that has been thickened by meditation, the experience of the body is dissolved, and in Turyagaa, that experience becomes non-experience (abhaana).
 
Indications Of The Seven Degrees
 
1. Shubhecchaa : When there is dispassion-filled seeking of liberation in the internal organ of a person, then that state is called "Shubhecchaa", which is considered the first degree. Its indications are discrimination, dispassion, the six-fold wealth and desire for liberation.
 
2. Vichaaranaa : The association with dispassion and practice of Vedantic scripture, with great persons who are established in Vedanta, as well as engagement in hearing, contemplation and meditation-oriented good conduct, is called "Vichaaranaa" which is the second degree. In this, approaching the teacher, hearing, contemplation and meditation are included.
 
3. Tanumanasaa : When shubhecchaa and vichaaranaa reach their fruition, the senses weaken their attachment to their objects, an due to the mind becoming "tanu" or subtle, the thought flows begin to return to their refuge. In other words, the mind begins to settle into the self. This is called "Tanumanasaa", the third degree. This is the fruition of meditation or concentration. By the discrimination of the "you" aspect alone, or of the "that" aspect alone, if it is filled with dispassion, the state of Tanumanasaa can be attained.
 
All three degrees are degrees of means of knowledge (saadhana).
 
4. Sattvapatti : This is the degree of attainment of knowledge. By the practice of the prior three degrees, and the dawning of the brahman-shaped thought flow due to the state of dispassion, the you-aspect self is experienced as one with the that-aspect Ishvara. This state of establishment in one's true nature is called "Sattvapatti", which is the fourth degree. This is the state of removal of ignorance. The person who has attained this state is called the "knower of brahman" (brahma vit).
 
5. Asamsakti : As the prior four degrees come to fruition, the mind becomes extremely unattached towards all objects. The realization of the identity between the self and brahman spreads across one's life. This fifth degree is called "Asamsakti". This is the state of liberated living (jeevan mukti). The person who has attained this state is called "brahma vidvar". For the liberated living knower of brahman, in this state, the entire creation is experienced like a dream. And the acceptance of doership-enjoyership-non-disconnected-worldliness does not occur in the "I". Due to his prior nature, he can remain occupied with any engagement or withdrawal of action. The first four degrees are due to effort, and the fifth is the result of realization. Most supreme persons are established in this state.
 
6. Padaarthabhavaanee : In this degree, the appearance of objects does not generally pulsate, since, due to the pulsation of the first five degrees, the illusoriness of name-form in his thought flow as well as the reality of his nature keeps getting firmer. Therefore, his cognition of objects happens sometimes, and does not happen other times. Therefore, the transactions of such a great person are controlled by other people. This is the first degree of body-less liberation. The person who has attained this state is called "brahma vidvareeyaan". This state is not attained through self effort. When the storehouse of actions of a liberated living person begins to empty, or when some prior desire is attained, this state dawns.
 
7. Turyagaa : This degree is the fruition of Padaarthabhavaanee. In this state, his notion of body as well as notion of objects is completely destroyed. His mind does not descend into the experience of body or object either by itself or due to others. Therefore, there is no movement in this state. It is also said that the body cannot remain in this state for more than twenty one days. It is clear that this state dawns when the storehouse of actions is destroyed. This is the final degree of body-less liberation. The person who has attained this state is called "brahma vidvarshtha"
 
The afore-mentioned states are of the mind or of the reflection of awareness (chidaabhaasa), which is the adjuncted awareness, not of the self. The self is always undivided, without modifications, established like an anvil. From the viewpoint of the seeker, shubhecchaa, vichaaranaa and tanumaanasaa are comparable to the waking state. Sattvapatti and asamsakti are comparable to the dream state, and padaarthabhavaanee and turyagaa to the deep sleep state. But for the knower of the essence, they are in reverse order - turyagaa and padaarthabhavaanee are the waking state, asamsakti and sattvapatti are the dream state, and tanumaanasaa, vicharanaa and shubhecchaa are the deep sleep state. From the viewpoint of the self, brahman and the essence, all these are the self.

19.3 Liberated Living Person (Jeevan Mukta)

The real meaning of the "I" is self. It is the infinite existence-consciousness nature. The adjectives of bound and free cannot be applied to it. Bondage means forgetting one's self, freedom means knowledge. In other words, removing that forgetfulness. The meaning here is that from the vision of the self, there is no reality to the bound or free, that only happens though the transactional viewpoint. If we analyze transaction from the viewpoint of the absolute and vice versa, then the true nature of both will become hidden. That is why, when you analyze freedom and bondage etc., only the transactional viewpoint should be kept in mind.
 
In the infinite awareness bliss reality, no type of duality can be imagined, and there is only duality in transactions. Good-bad, sinner-saint and great soul-bad soul, such distinctions have been going on in time immemorial in transactions. Without this, transactions cannot proceed. In this situation, we will have to define great soul and bad soul (mahaatmaa and duraatmaa). This is necessary for the order in society and for the benefit of the seeker. But these qualities cannot apply to the living liberated great soul, because they are as they are. They do not need the knowledge of their own qualities. They are not bound inside these qualities, they have gone beyond, far beyond them, established in their infinite nature. They do not need a certificate to assert that they are a great soul or a bad soul. In their vision, everyone is their own true nature alone. That is why qualities are created for ordinary souls, who are burning in the sins of the world, and want to rest under a calming, happy and dense shade. They want to give up their anxiety, agitation and delusion, and want to rest in a peaceful place, and want someone delicate hands to pat their back. Therefore, we will have to ascertain these qualities based on our own vision. We select these great souls based on our values, liking and nature, and will continue to do so.
 
But, if we insist on having everything our way, we cannot rid ourselves of this scary maze of maayaa. Due to accumulating desires in birth upon birth, we have become mixed up in our situations, and have become accustomed to them. That is why, whenever we come across anything that is opposed to our thinking, we neglect it or oppose it. We only take that to be true which has been weighed and measured by our intellect, and in doing so, we are bereft of the real truth. Then what should we do? Should we take someone's refuge? That is why scripture has given us the qualities of a saint and a living liberated person.
 
In shruti, the words to indicate such a person are : "shrotreeya, brahma nishtha, braahman, brahma vid". In the Gita, the words to indicate such a person are : "sithita prajnya, bhakta and gunaateeta". In the Yoga Vasishta, the words to indicate such a person are : "jeevan mukta, videha mukta". In the Puraanaas, it is "ativarnaashramee". They all refer to the same person, who has attained the state which is the result of all methods. For example, one who reaches the absolute state using the primary means of action and the secondary means of devotion and knowledge is called a "sthita prajnya" in the Gita. Similarly, one who reaches the absolute state using the primary means of devotion and the secondary means of action and knowledge is called a "bhakta". And one who reaches the absolute state using the primary means of knowledge and the secondary means of devotion and action is called a "gunaa teeta". All of them have attained the same state, everyone is established in the absolute, and all are fulfilled with action, devotion and knowledge, yet, for the sake of distinguishing from the standpoint of methods, there is difference in name alone.
 
In the Yoga Vaasishta, Shree Vasishta has described many qualities of a liberated living person. We now take them up one by one.
 
1. In this moment, in front of our thought flows, we see mountains, rivers and forests, we see specific aspects of the world. When all of these, including our body and senses are pulled away from us, in other words, during the time of the world's dissolution, all these distinctions set like the sun! But in the liberating living persons, it is not so. This entire creations remains as it is, and transactions also keep going on. Since dissolution does not happen, others experience clearly as before. But, since there are no thought flows that experience this world in the liberated living person, he does not experience anything as in sleep, it sets. Now, in sleep, the seed of thought flow remains in the form of impressions, and the entire world rises again. But there is no seed in the living liberated person. Therefore, he does not experience the world again.
 
2. A worldly person, according to his praarabdha (storehouse of previous actions), becomes happy or sad based on states of the world such as receiving a garland of flowers, or receiving insults and abuses from people. But the liberated living person remains situated in peace no matter what he receives from the world, he has no specific desire. Firstly, since he is established in his true nature, the liberated living person does not experience these objects, and even if he experiences them for a little while, his firmness of knowledge and the absence of grasping and rejecting notions do not leave any room for happiness or sorrow. Here, the key point to be noted is that our storehouse of actions brings only the causes of joy and sorrow, not the actual joys and sorrows that follow. According to the wheel of action, situations keep arising, but due to attachment, we become happy or sad. For instance, due to our storehouse of actions, we may not receive food one day. This much is the effect of our storehouse of actions. But in that we become sad, this is the result of attachment, and attachment happens due to ignorance. Since we are unacquianted with
the motions and true nature of the wheel of the world, we become attached to some space, time and matter, and we become happy or sad. Why would the liberated living person become happy or sad with this? This is their specialty.
 
3. His external sense organs remain situated in their receptacles, they are not withdrawn, that is why he remains awake. But since this thought flows face inward, or they are absent, it is one type of deep sleep. That is why the sense organs do not grasp their objects, and all of the indications of the waking state do not manifest fully. That is why this state cannot be called either waking or sleeping. Cognition happens, but it is not desire-prompted cognition, like it happens in dream or waking state. Sometimes "I know brahman", this type of thought flow arises, this is indicated by the word desire. This desire does not exist in a liberated living person. Where there is a thought that I have known the infinite awareness-nature brahman, there lies a doership of knowledge ascribed to the self, and that cannot be called pure knowledge. When doership and enjoyership has been negated, only cognition without the triad of knower-known-knowing remains, then it is called desire-free cognition. This nature of cognition alone is the nature of the liberated living person.
 
4. From the viewpoint of people, he appears to transact with attraction, aversion and fear etc. Place, cleanliness, lunch etc. appears to happen as per his likings, he only eats saattvic food, he discards tamas, worrying about his house and bad company. He also appears to be afraid of animals like snake etc. Due to continuation of old habits that were negated, in a state of lost self control, such instances do occur, but since his internal organ is pure, it does not get dirty. Does space get contaminated by dust or clouds? No. Similarly, the heart of the liberated living person also remains ever, always and everywhere pure.
 
Another point needs to be said here. Liberated living persons are found in all stages of life and in all occupations. They never cross the limits of their occupations of life stages. Why should one cross limits that have been handed down through tradition, when for him, all actions are the same? Yes, a lower kind of action can be given up for a higher kind of action. But, in the observance of limits, there should be no inadvertance, nor the excuse that one is a liberated living person. It is also true that for those liberated living persons who have in the true sense renounced their occupation and life stage, no one has the right to say anything to them.
 
5. Whenever a person does anything, the arrogation of "I am the doer of this action" happens. There is also the expectation of a result in this world or the next, and his intellect gets wrapped with this notion. On the other hand, by forcefully restraining the organs of sense and actions as well as the internal organ, and renouncing all the actions, "I have stopped all action", this arrogation also happens. This will result in liberation, his intellect gets wrapped with this notion also. But, whether the living liberated person appears to work or to give up work, in both states, his arrogation and intellect do not get stuck anywhere. I am a doer, I am a renouncer, this notion does not arise. Both states remain in front of him.
 
This state is self known (sva sam vedya). These great persons have risen above doership. In them, arrogation, attachment and the stickiness of the intellect is not present. Due to this, there are no other actions for them besides spontaneous actions. And such spontaneous actions have been described in the Gita. Or, spontaneous (sahaja) can be understood like this - actions that happen prior to cognition. Since their flow is broken (pravaaha patita) and there are no desires to stop those actions and take them in another direction, those practiced actions continue. Yes, this much is certain that in that moment, there were no sinful actions otherwise cognition would not have occured. In our view, in the life of the liberated living person, all kinds of incidents will occur due to the storehouse of actions, but their prior desires (sankalpa), attachment to them and their doership does not remain, and since everything is seen through the vision of the self as the self, the actions do not yield any results.
 
6. Whenever worldly people come across someone that they think will hurt them in any way, or experience something opposite to their behaviour and thinking, they become agitated. Even seekers get agitated when they see jealously and hatred from people, and their attachment to the world. But the liberated living person is not a stranger to someone, he is the self of all. He does not expect anything negative or inappropriate from anyone. Then why would anyone become afraid of him? His spiritual practice does not get affected by seeing other peoples' worldly attachments, since his spiritual practice is spontaneous, it is not artificial that it will break due to someone's contact or obstacles. That is why he is not afraid of anyone. Everything is attained to him, that is why he is never elated at receiving any object. He does not have any competitors, therefore he does not get angry at anyone. There is fear in duality. You can only be scared of another. There is no "other" for the liberated living person, then who will he become afraid of? He is always revelling in his self, content in his self, and satisfied in his self.
 
7. Due to various incorrect thinking in the form of "this is an enemy, this is a friend, he is indifferent, he is to be honoured, this is an insult", worldly people tend to burn. But the liberated living people do not think incorrectly in this manner, therefore they always remain at peace. Even though endowed with sixty four qualities, they do not have any pride towards them, nor do they display them in any transactions. Also, even though appearing endowed with body, breath and other manifestations - divisions, they are devoid, in other words, unmanifest. In our vision, he appears to possess a mind, but in reality, since thought flows do not arise in him, he has no mind. No wonder he is without worry.
 
8. It is quite common for worldly people people to visit someone else's house on the occasion of a festival etc. and perform various tasks for that person's happiness. While performing those tasks, even worldly people do not get affected by the mental modifications of profit, loss, elation, sorrow and so on. Similarly, since there is no "other" for the liberated living person, he remains free of all mental modifications in all transactions, his heart is always calm! It is not the case that he remains calm only because he his free of all of the anxieties caused by obstacles and roadblocks. It is because he is constantly established in his unchangeable complete self element.
 
So long as such a self established great person's body is visible to us, we call him a liberated living person, and by taking refuge at his feet, we attain the supreme benevolence. When his body drops, we say that he has become body-free liberated (videha mukta). With regards to that, nothing can be said.
 
But yes, this state of liberated living is attained only through the desire-destroyed, mind-annihilated, knowledge of self alone,
not through any one of these three. The truth is that they are related, without one, the other cannot be attained. That is why, with great earnestness, all three should be practiced.

19.2 Undeniable Truth (Abaadha Satya)

The self is not an object of any sense organ. It does not have any connection with feelings. Even the witness cannot make it a seen. In such a situation, having any opinions about that which is beyond opinions is absurd. Opinions can only be formed about something that is known, felt or experienced through senses. That which is the illuminator of the arising-setting of all opinions, which does not require any means, self-proven, self luminous, cannot be touched by the cacophony of dissenting opinions. Distinction of direction is an opinion, distinction of space is an opinion, distinction of object is an opinion, distinction of three internal differences is an opinion also. Opinion means the expression of a name and form. There could be some distinctions made whether it is beginning-less or with beginning, believer or atheist, but one can never experience the absence of oneself. So there could be several distinctions of the self : one-many, with or without attributes, real-unreal, aware-inert, happy-sad, disconnected-undisconnected, but the self does not fall under any categorization of such opinions or contradictions. This is the reason why the speech of the opinionators can never touch the self. Their saying, accepting or thinking cannot bring any adornment or insult to the self. There are several conclusions and determinations made about the self based on worldly transactions - void-real, aware-inert, doer-non doer, enjoyer-non enjoyer, going from world to world, perishable-immortal, happy-sad, sinner-saint, they are only inferences based on worldly transactions, in other words, they are imaginations only.
 
Inference needs a basis. It is based on evidence, it requires induction or deduction. All this only happens in worldly transactions. That which is based on shruti, beyond opinion, beyond senses, beyond knowledge cannot fall under the realm of inference. Therefore, that which can be known through Vedanta cannot be attained though all of these means, they do not hold any value.
 
Every sense organ can only grasp its corresponding objects, their form and their absence, but no sense organ can grasp that which another organ can. Even word, touch, form, taste and smell cannot be grasped in their entirety, and also, all of these senses do not have the same strength. Through their respective strengths, in their respective spheres, they can only grasp proximate objects. Their course, their intelligence, their love, their strength, their distinctions, their expression, everything is limited. This is the reason that whenever we begin to investigate the self with our senses, then eventually it concludes in the darkness of ignorance, and we fit ourselves into some imagination there, and we get stuck with some obsession of our belief. For instance, if someone were to set off to find out the limit of what is north, what is south, what is east or west etc., their energy would be exhausted, but they will not find the limit. Since at each step, something even beyond the current state will be imagined. The beginning and end of space and time cannot be found inside space or time, it can only be found in that subtle realm where that space and time is experienced. The start and end of space is not in any other infinite space, it is only found in the perception-nature self. This applies to time as well.
 
If you set off to find the beginning of history or the end of the future, you will never find them, your energy of searching will become depleted. When you cannot find the beginning or end of the past or the future, you will not have any calculation to determine the extent of the present moment. While finding the present moment, you will face the same situation that you did when searching for limits of the past and future. All these limits will be mere imaginations, and even these imaginations will only be delusions born of ignorance. The acceptance of beginningless-ness is also a result of ignorance alone. This is the same case with the eternal-like nature of external objects.
 
In reality, there is no need to run towards the ends of space, time and matter, and put forth efforts to grasp their limits for the realization of truth. To understand their true nature, we will have to turn the face of our research and inquiry. The seer (drishtaa) alone is the knowledge, perception (bhaana) is experience. Therefore, by turning away from the seen, and by turning our face inwards towards the seer, the internal self, is the only way. This is nothing else but inquisitiveness and a desire to learn the true nature of knowledge. You can see for yourself. Do you want to make the truth into a known entity, an object of knowledge, or, do you want to end the turning away from your own knowledge-nature self, your self-created veiling?
 
Whether you accept it or not, this is a fact. You can try to cut this veiling with the sword of your thinking. But if you have the notion of importance in the seen, no matter where it is - in the inner seen, outer seen, body, non-body, in the I, in the this, in the you, in the that, then you will not be able to cut that important entity which you yourself have accepted as important. That is why, leave the imagination of samaadhi after time, leave the greed for the abode of Brahma after space, leave the greed for objects. With firm determination, pursue the investigation into the perception-nature self which illuminates all of these, and which does not require another entity to illuminate it.
 
There is always a notion of importance, of rejection, of happiness, of inclusion, of sorrow, which is maintained in any seen, whether inner-outer or close-far. As long as this is the case, there is not doubt that your intelligence will be incapable of cutting the veiling which is covering up the true self which is illuminating you. The intellect will want to see that which it illuminates, and will be engaged in painting the seen with the red of desire and the black of aversion. It will not be able ti become white and pure, and experience the non-difference with the self illumining substratum self, which is self proven. This technique is known in scripture as withdrawal, dispassion or internal purification.
 
There are two forms to our obsession: one is in our personality (vyaktitva), whether it is subtle or gross or without reason, this is natural. Second is the worldliness of this world and the next superimposed by scripture. The obsession of objects advocated by the superimposition of scriptures is eventually negated by scripture itself. But the natural obsession with our personality is removed only through deep longing and investigation-examination-perception of the self. It is so deeply rooted that even with Ishvara, saamadhi and attainment of liberation, we want to decorate our personality alone. But the realization of the truth is not an ornament of the personality, it expels all distinctions between unmanifest and manifest.
 
Whether it is personality or distinction, it will always be opposed to itself, and will always be contentious, since it is seen through differing perspectives, and there are no uniform intermediate stages in the seen. Personality can never be beyond contention and opposition, whether it has to do with Ishvara, the soul or of the inert. Therefore, shruti, scripture, tradition and teachers say, do not deposit yourself into any container of any categorization. That which is invisible, not possible to grasp, imperishable, beyond knowing, unseen, the attainment of that non-contentious truth alone is without opposition. In other words, it is the total remover of attraction and aversion.
 
We then come to a decision where no matter how many specific entities or distinctions are out there, they are all seen, and so they can become topics of contention. If we apply any specificity or adjective (visheshana) to truth, then in the modified part of the truth, opposition-oriented entities will arise. If there is no adjective, there is no cause for any duality. Non-specific means non-dual. This non-duality cannot become dependent on another, because, when we accept "this" or "that" as non-dual, the self will become their illuminator, distinct from them. Knowledge is the very nature of the self, the self is perception only (bhaana maatra). Whatever other remains as the known-unknown, will become an object of the imagination in the form of known-unknown, it will be illuminated. Non-duality or completeness is not an adjective of the self, it is its nature. Or we can also say that it is a scriptural superimposition to remove the delusion of incompleteness and duality. It is clear that the distinction between the self and the not-self, the imagination of any reality other than our own is born out of personality. Only the arrogation of a personality separates it from others, and separates others from it. The decision here is that arrogation is only due to ignorance of the absolute truth. The scriptures unweariedly strive to remove this ignorance.
 
We hear that there was nothing before the self in the form of space, time and matter. We hear that there is nothing after the self in the form of space and time. There is nothing inside or outside space. We hear that the self is the self of all, and is experienced as such. The self is immanent and immediate, all-knowing, devoid of all distinctions. In such a situation, there is no doubt of its brahman-nature. This is the reason that the creator of the "Vivarana" school say that hearing alone is the way to remove ignorance. Hearing means the firm resolve with regards to the brahman-nature of the self. But if even then there remained a doubt in the means or the target, then contemplation along the lines of logic that supports shruti, and if there remains any counter thoughts, then the thought flows of the mind would need to be stabilized in the meaning of the shruti statements using meditation. A seeker with a pure mind and intent desire for liberation would not even require hearing. Then why would he need contemplation or meditation? Thought flow and reversal (aavritti) is established only in the personality. As long as there is the notion of reality and identification with the personality, body or in any kind of disconnected entity, the reversal of the brahman-shaped thought flow is required.
 
But one should be careful that this reversal should not make the self into a thought-flow. When ignorance along with doubts and incorrect thoughts is removed, then complete non-duality, and foremost fearlessness is established. Fearlessness, complete wisdom (knowledge of one leading to knowledge of all) and lordship over everything (the capacity to renounce everything) - these are the consequent results of the knowledge of the essence. Consequent means that there is no other effort or practice that is needed for these, they appear spontaneously. All minds and powers engage themselves in the service of the knower of the essence, since he is the self-illumined substratum of even intelligent and powerful, in the form of brahman. The omniscient and omnipotent supreme Ishvara appears in the non-dual self by looking towards creation, not from the vision of one's true nature.
 
The self is indicated by the removal of ignorance as ever-pure-knower-free. There can be no association of any kind of duty, emotion, practice or reversal of thought flow with that self. If knowledge also were to be devoid of independence, then how can the animal tendency be removed? Knowledge devoid of independence (svaatantrya heena bodha) is dirt, independence devoid of knowledge is idiocy, it is unrestrained behaviour, it is animal tendency. Our true nature is free of the burden of any duties, emotions, practices or reversals. No matter what comes in the form of a seen, power-powerful, thought-flow or one with the thought-flow, samaadhi or one with samaadhi, worship-worshipper, all of them appear in the container (adhikarana) of their "yaavat" nature, therefore they are extremely illusory. After realization, after removal of ignorance, the afore-mentioned causes-effects and methods and techniques have no essence or importance.
Whether it is an appearance or a reflection, creation-vision or vision-creation, everything is meant for sincere seekers to imbibe the absolute into their hearts. To get obsessed with it is not appropriate. It may be needed to defeat someone in an argument, or to solidify one's faith, but only in the initial stages. Where there is no action or modification, there no method or technique works. Adjunctor-adjuncted, disconnector-disconnected, reflector-reflected etc. such imaginations are useful only to indicate and realize the brahman-nature of our self. When that happens, all these imaginations becomes useless, and they become the target of "not this, not this". The question is, what is the "this" in "not this"? Answer - this means that what is deserving of negation. It means everything that is imagined or non-imagined, immediate and non-immediate scene only. Its negation is included in the "this" world, and that is the meaning.
 
But who is the illuminator of this negation? Who is the substratum? That which remains when everything has been negated, who is that remained? Our self? Space, time, matter, three-fold differences are the in category of negation, the distinction between world, soul, Ishvara also is in that same category. In situation, anything that remains, is beyond anything specific, is our own self, and there is not a whiff of distinction in it. Fighting over distinctions in the seen is similar to arguing whether the water in a mirage is 10 feet or 100 feet deep. How deep is the blueness of the sky is a topic use to prove the prowess of a debater. Just like the discussion of a canvas-less painting or a space-less rose is immaterial, the discussion about the beauty or ugliness of anything sees is just a web of words.
 
Hearing, only hearing! Why only this hearing? It is because there are two instances where no other means, logic or technique cannot reveal the knowledge. First: even non-immediate heaven, the realm of Brahmaa, the cause of the world etc. and the means to attain all these. The methods that are known by visible etc. means are connected to other-worldly ever-non-immediate materials. There is no other means besides hearing to know that connection. This means that the reality of the ever-non-immediate object and the technique of attaining it both happen with hearing.
 
Second: The knowledge of the ever-present-immediate object which is unknown, like the brahman-ness of the self. This can only be known by hearing. The self is always immediate, without the need for means, without thought-flow. Even in deep sleep. The self is never non-immediate, it is ever attained. Only ignorance has become its veil, as though. It is neither in the realm of senses like pot-cloth etc., nor non-immediate like heaven. I-I-I, the thought-flows in this manner at its essence is the one and only one self. Distinction is in the category of seen. Beyond all disconnections, this self element, only due to ignorance does it seem to be unavailable, as thought. That which is unattainable due to ignorance is ever attained, and that which is attained by knowledge was always attained. That is why, for the removal of ignorance, there is nothing needed besides knowledge. Knowledge removes ignorance only. It does not gain or lose an object. Therefore, once knowledge leads to ignorance, knowledge itself becomes useless, in other words, knowledge does not have to be repeated again and again. This knowledge does remove ignorance but "I am knowledgeable" - it does not attain this arrogation. But, except for the self, there is arrogation of knowledge in everything that is known, plus that knowledge has to be repeated.
 
Now bring your attention to this astounding point. When anything except the self is known, that knowledge leaves behind an impression (samskaara), memory of that arises often, and that object is considered good or bad, and it needs to be attained or discarded. The point is that there is a need of practice, of action for that object. But in the knowledge of the self, there is no impression created. If after knowledge, the object becomes non-immediate, then the impression and the object within that impression arises due to memory. But, after the removal of ignorance, the self remains as the self-illumined experience-nature. Therefore, impression and memory does not arise.
 
The second point to keep in mind is this. Any seen object have some kind of relationship notion. That is why, the knowledge of any seen object will be connected to some action, worship and yoga, and when that knowledge happens, some duty will remain. There is no relationship notion in the self, therefore even when its knowledge happens, nothing remains to be performed, worshipped or enjoyed. Therefore, there is fullness only in self knowledge. There is nothing to disconnect or create distinction in thsi knowledge. It itself is beyond the division of knower and known, the non-dual brahman.
 
All opinions are arguments are to do with the seen alone, this point has been mentioned earlier. There is no scope for any posturing in the non-seen, non-imbibed, non-dual brahman nature. Any devotion or hatred is all due to outward-facing-ness. Outward-facing-ness (bahiramukhataa) is an effect of ignorance alone. Let those who are ignorance quarrel - they have to support. The knower of the essence experiences every position taken in every argument as illusory in his self-illumined substratum self. This is the reason why:
 
Only through this alone-nature identity of brahman and self knowledge permanently removes attraction and aversion at their roots. Bliss at all times, bliss everywhere, all is bliss, since all times, everywhere and all, these words do not denote anything else except the substratum, and non-dual, fearless, void of hoarding and acquisition, only the self alone is the on true reality.

19.1 Means And Result

The means and result of Vedanta is extremely unique. Injunction is command-dominant, worship is faith-dominant, and Vedanta is means-dominant. In injunction, rituals are key. In worship, love and direction (aavritti) is key. In Vedanta, thinking is key, and this alone is the means in Vedanta. In other words, the firm resolution of the philosophy of the Upanishads through the words of the teacher - this is hearing. Understanding the one underlying meaning behind the scriptures through analyzing, argumentating and using other means with regards to what is heard - this is contemplation. Flowing the intellect alone the meaning of the great statements of the shruti is meditation. For the foremost seeker, through hearing alone does the brahman-shaped thought flow dawn. But for the mid-level and lower-level seeker, contemplation and meditation is required. This brahman shaped thought flow alone will destroy ignorance, therefore in Vedanta, this is the end of means.
 
The result of injunction is happiness, it is the happiness of heaven as well as the enjoyment-oriented happiness of upcoming births. The result of worship is the thought-flow shaped in the form of the worshipped, and the vision of what is dear. The result of worshipping an entity with form and attributes is the vision of the dear with form. The result of worshipping an entity without form but with attributes is the mental visibility (maanasa pratyaksha) of the inner controller, by which the intellect is surrendered to him. In Vedanta, the mental visibility of brahman also does not happen since brahman is without form and without attributes. Therefore, in Vedanta, the ignorance pertaining to the identity of the self and brahman only has to be removed. Brahman shaped thought flow is only for removal of ignorance. Brahman is the self of the seeker alone. Removal of ignorance alone is the result of Vedanta.
 
By negating all thoughts and impressions, by negating thought flows, in other words, even negating "result pervasion" (phala vyaapti), by realizing it as it is, to remove the ignorance of what is, and for that reason, to create the brahman shaped thought flow - this is the immediate means of Vedanta.
 
The knowledge of thought flow (vritti jnyaana of brahman shaped vritti) is not the result of Vedanta, since after removal of ignorance, the knowledge of thought flow itself is removed. When ignorance is removed, all misfortune is removed, self-proven supreme bliss-nature in the form of our self is established in its own nature - this is the result of Vedanta. This is the nature of liberation.
 
Question: Thought flow itself is the effect of ignorance. Then through the knowledge of thought flow, how can ignorance be removed?
 
Answer: Where the notion of remover-removed is considered real, the effect-oriented knowledge of thought flow cannot remove the cause-oriented ignorance. But, whatever has a cause-effect relationship with ignorance is all false. Whatever object is created out of ignorance, has never been created in reality. There, the cause-effect relationship is only a delusion. Therefore, the knowledge of thought flow is capable of removing ignorance. Along with ignorance, the cause-effect nature of the world is also imagined. Where there is an imagined cause-effect relationship, there by the removal of the effect, even the cause which is ignorance, is removed.
 
In reality, in our true nature, the notion of means and result both do not exist! In essence, thought flow does not remove the veil (avarana bhanga), only the awareness which rides on the thought flow dos so. The awareness which rides on the brahman shaped thought flow generated by great statements removes ignorance. After that, even the thought flow itself is negated. Only awareness remains.
 
One more time, we remind the seeker of his original inspiration due to which he engaged in the knowledge of Vedanta, which is the eternal removal of sorrow, and the attainment of supreme bliss, or liberation. Sorrow comes from ignorance, happiness resides in the self. Through the brahman shaped thought flow generated by great statements, when the ignorance is removed, then the seed of all sorrows is destroyed. After that, what is left? Self illumined happiness of brahman. This alone is liberation. The self indicated by the removal of ignorance alone is called liberation. This is the result of the science of Vedanta.
 
Liberation is not a state. It is not a state of the body, mind, or of any method. It is just the name of the self, which is of the nature of itself. Liberation is a non-distinct vision, complete satisfaction, unrestricted independence. The distinction between liberation after death and liberation while alive is out of ignorance alone. The knower of the essence is liberated at the very time of knowledge. In scripture, liberation after death is a reassurance for the beginning seeker and liberation while living is the praise of self knowledge, therefore are part of eulogizing. In a certain part of the scripture, liberation after death is completely negated. In some other scriptures, the unrestricted independence of the liberated while alive person is glorified.
 
Question: Who is free?
 
Answer: In reality, no one becomes free. He who had the delusion of bondage, arrogation of bondage, is freed of the delusion and arrogation by knowledge. The self is always free - it was never bound and never freed. The body is always bound by the laws of nature, and will continue to be bound. There was a delusion of bondage in the reflected awareness (chidaabhaasa) soul since it had a delusion of its own reality distinct from that of brahman. That delusion was removed by knowledge and he realized - I am ever-pure-wise-free-brahman alone. Only the free can be free, this is the statement of the Vaartikaa writer.
 
Even the various degrees within liberation are not absolute. Every body-dweller behaves according to his nature, whether he is a wise knower or not.
 
Question: Does the "praarabdha" (storehouse of old desires) remain in the wise knower?
 
Answer: Whose praarabha? The body is unreal for the wise knower! What praarabdha exists for the unreal? The unreal cannot have praarabdha. Even in transactions, praarabdha exists for the body, not for the self. Due to identification with this body, ignorant souls accept its praarabdha as their own. When knowledge arises, this identification vanishes. Therefore, one who has knowledge does not accept any praarabdha. However, to reconcile the actions of the wise knower for the benefit of the ignorant, the scripture also talks about "praarabdha for the wise knower". In the vision of the wise knower, creation is ever fresh, non-distinct from brahman, then where is there any room for the praarabdha of mine and yours?

19.0 Means And Result Of Vedanta

18.8 Techniques For Reaching Oneness

a) There is a question - how long does it take for the soul to become Ishvara? The answer is - the same time taken by a Hindu to become a human. A Hindu is a human alone. If the arrogation of Hindu-ness remains, a human remains Hindu. Similarly, the soul is Ishvara alone, the arrogation of soul-ness has not gone. Arrogation of the body (deha abhimaana) alone is soul-ness. All one has to do is to conduct discrimination on the lines of five sheaths, five elements, three bodies, tristate etc. and experience the aware soul as the pure witness, distinct from the adjuncts of body-senses-min. Also, over there, he has to experience Ishvara as distinct from the cause of the adjuncts, maayaa. In experience, the pure witness and Ishvara are not two. The non-adjuncted entity is one alone. All diversity is in the adjunct.
 
b) Here is a well known point. The seen is distinct from the seer, but is this distinction real? No. The seer sees the seen, and also sees the absence of the seen. The absence of the seen cannot be distinct from its substratum. Therefore, the seer himself is the substratum of the seen. That is why, the seer is distinct from the seen, but the seen is not distinct from the seer. The seen is appearing there where there is an absence of the seen. Therefore, by appearing in the container (adhikarana) of its absence, the seen is illusory.
 
Is there some limit between the seer and the seen that says - upto here is the seer and upto here is the seen? What is in the middle of the seer and the seen? It will neither be a seer nor be a seen since this alone is the question. Maybe it is vision itself! But that is the nature of the seer. It may be an instrument of vision, but that also will become the seen. In reality, in between the seer and the seen, there is only the ignorance of the non-disconnectedness of the seer. Where the limit between the seer and the seen alone is ignorance, there the distinction between the seer and the seen also has ignorance at its root.
 
c) Where is the difference between the seer and the seen? When the topic of the seer equipped with the adjunct of the intellect comes up, that seer becomes disconnected. Then his name becomes knower or "pramaataa". There are differences between one knower and another, since the difference lies in the adjunct of the intellect. But, that pure seer who leaves the adjunct of the intellect cannot have any distinctions in him. This means that the seer in different internal organs is not different, he is the same.
 
If we accept distinctions in the seer based on distinctions in the adjunct, then there are different adjuncts in different spaces. Therefore, the question will be, are the adjuncts related to space, or is space an adjunct? In other words, in space, are there distinct adjuncts, or is space seen differently in one adjunct?
 
In the first case, even when there is removal of the adjunct, there will not be removal of space, then there will be no liberation. The second case is not correct, since different spaces cannot be the refuge of the adjunct. Therefore, that adjunct which makes the entire creation appear is one, which is ignorance or avidyaa. Therefore, even the seer is one. Everything else is an appearance of the soul or "jeevaabhaasa".
 
d)What is in between the soul and Ishvara? What is between one soul and another? What is between the soul and world? One world and another? World and Ishvara? All of these have one answer - ignorance, the ignorance of the oneness of the substratum and illuminator, the ignorance of the oneness between the refuge and object of ignorance. All differences are due to ignorance, ignorance is removed through knowledge, the result of knowledge is annihilation of all distinctions.
 
People who accept distinctions between the soul, Ishvara, the world as being caused by action or desire, they accept injunction and worship as liberation. But their liberation cannot be eternal. Vedanta accepts only ignorance as the cause of distinctions, therefore they accept knowledge as liberation and this liberation is eternal.
 
e) If the soul and Ishvara are different, how are they different? Are they two in reality, or in space, or in time? If they are two in time, then there is Ishvara in one time and the soul in another, both are perishable, and then space becomes the essence (tatta)! If they are two in space, then both become disconnected, then who will differentiate the two spaces? In reality both cannot be different since existence consciousness is one. If we say that Ishvara is of the nature of bliss, and the soul is the enjoyer of that bliss, then Ishvara happens for the soul, the soul becomes great instead of Ishvara! If there is a difference in the actions of both, then it is due to adjunct, not in reality. Ishvara's adjunct is the cause-oriented maayaa, and that of the soul is effect-oriented internal organ. This proves that all differences of the soul and Ishvara are caused by the arrogation by the soul of its adjunct. In reality, the same awareness is called soul due to arrogation with body, and called Ishvara without arrogation.
 
f) In scripture, distinction and non-distinction between the soul and Ishvara, both are described, and both are required. In distinction, there is an ritual of worship. By it, desires (vaasanaas) are destroyed and propensity of knowledge dawns in the internal organ. The non-distinct truth is only indicated, that is the completion of the knowledge of the essence.

18.7 Self Is Same As Brahman (Ayam Aatmaa Brahman)

This great statement is found in the Maandookya as well as the Brihadaaranyaka Upanishads. Here, using the word "ayam" , a gradual (finger pointing method), the great statement shows the self as brahman. It is clear thought this that the immediate self element which is prevalent in the body as the "I" form alone is brahman.
 
In the first mantra of the Maandookya, it is said that the "omkaara" is the all. Then the cause is provided in the second mantra - since all this is brahman. Brahman is that entity whose name is omkaara. By being the non-distinct intelligent and material cause, all this is brahman, and by being the indicator of brahman, "omkaara" or "pranava" is all, this is said. What is this brahman, where is it? What is its connection with me? In answer to this, the shruti says "the self is same as brahman".
 
That brahman is not anything other than you, it is not non-immediate, he who is dwelling in your body, the knowledge-nature self, that brahman alone you are. How to know this? That brahman which is appearing as all forms in this world and which is the self of all, has four steps - vishva, taijasa, praajnya and tureeya. In this, that which is the tureeya step alone is the self and is brahman. In this manner, in "self is same as brahman", the self aspect denotes the tureeya element, and the brahman aspect denotes the omkaara-denoted brahman element. All this is manifested in the form of this world.
 
The first step of the self is vishva. In the waking state, it is manifested by the body-mind-senses as the knower, enjoyer and doer of gross substances. In this step, it is as if the self becomes a viewer outside (bahish prajnya). The second step of the self is taijasa. In the dream state, it is manifested as the knower doer enjoyer of subtle substances. In this step, it is as if the self becomes its own viewer (antara prajnya). The third step of the self is praajnya which is manifested in the deep sleep state and the seer of the "non-visible state of the other". In this step, it is as if the self coalesces all of awareness into itself and enjoys bliss. But in this state, the seed of the visible knowledge of waking and dreaming state is not destroyed. That is why, when deep sleep ends, the states of waking and dream appear as they were before. Therefore, praajnya is the seed state of vishva and of taijasa. Who is the self in all of these? The self is the awareness element indicated by negating all these three states. That alone is tureeya. That alone is the witness. By leaving the "bahihi" adjunct in the "bahish prajnya" and leaving the "sthoola" adjunct in "sthoola bhuk", "vishva" is the seer self alone. Similarly, in the "antahaprajya taijasa", by leaving the "antaha" adjunct and in "sookshma bhuk" leaving the "sookshma" adjunct, taijasa is also the witness self. "Praajnya" is also the witness self. The only thing to do is to leave the adjuncts of seedness and "non-visible-ness". It means that the tristate witness self alone is the tureeya, and in the distinctions between the states, there is no distinction in the witness.
 
This witness is in the body, this is understood. Is it also outside the body? In reality, the body and the space inside and outside it is a seen by the witness. By being of the nature of knowledge, space, time, object and their distinctions have been imagined in knowledge alone. Therefore, all of these are in the tummy of knowledge. Their appearance alone is their existence and that is non-different than their awareness-nature witness. Appearance is knowledge alone. Therefore this witness is the non-dual brahman.
 
Think about this - I am not the "vishva" awareness disconnected by the adjunct of the waking state. I am not the "viraata" awareness disconnected by the adjunct of the gross macrocosmic world. I am not the "taijasa" awareness disconnected by the adjunct of the dream state. I am not the "hiranyagarbha" awareness disconnected by the adjunct of the subtle macrocosmic world. I am not the awareness disconnected by the adjunct of the deep sleep state. I am not the "Ishvara" awareness disconnected by the adjunct of the seed-macrocosmic world. Then what am I? I am the illuminator of all these states and micro-macro adjuncts. Without me, they do not have any existence. Therefore, I alone am their substratum. In this manner I am the witness self brahman.
 
This brahman has no cause, no effect, it is endless, without inside and outside. This self alone is brahman. it experiences everything (Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad 2.5.19). This is the teaching of all Vedantas.
 
By calling it "all experiencer" (sarvaanubhoohu), this self has been indicated as the witness. That which is the witness is brahman, that which is the brahman is the witness.
 
That which imbibes objects in the waking state, that which imagines objects in the dream state, that which eats objects in the deep sleep state, that which remains same in all three states, that alone is called the self. This self is the all-substratum, all-illuminator, non-distinction-nature brahman alone.

18.6 Awareness Is Brahman (Prajnyaanam Brahman)

That by which all is known, and the absence of the all is known also, it is called awareness or pure knowledge (prajnyaan). That awareness is your self, it is you, and that alone is brahman. There is a triad of knower, knowledge and known. That which illuminates all three aspects of this triad, and is devoid of this triad, is awareness. Pure knowledge means supreme knowledge. If you accept distinctions in knowledge, you create disconnectedness in knowledge. But knowledge is never disconnected, it is the illuminator even of this disconnectedness.
 
Waking and other states, the objects contained in those states, and their arrogations, that one illuminator, that witness is you alone. This great statement says that you are the non-disconnected brahman.
 
That which is the infinite non-disconnected entity, will not be the object of the intellect, and cannot ever be so. If it were, then you would have known it by now. The infinite is the non-object (avishaya) of the intellect. Have you seen the beginning or end of time? Can you see the ends of the east and west directions with your intellecT? If they are not there to begin with, what will it see? The intellect can only imbibe disconnectedness. In this state, there needs to be a means of knowledge that reveals the infinite. The great statements reveal the infinite, and "awareness is brahman" is one of them. At the root of this world which looks endless, this great statement posits a non-immediate imagined existence consciousness bliss essence. It then describes the oneness of that with the immediate existence consciousness bliss self element. By doing so, it negates all ascribed notions of disconnectedness in the self. The knowledge-only self (awareness) which is indicated by negating all notions of disconnectedness alone is brahman, this is the meaning.
 
Awareness is the purified I (you aspect) and brahman is the that aspect. See chapter 14-3 for more explanation.

18.5 I Am Brahman (Aham Asmi)

In the "you are that" statement, the indicated meaning of the "you" aspect is the pure witness awareness. It is the same indicated meaning of the "I" aspect of the "I am brahman" statement also. That very pure witness is denoted as brahman here. The "brahman" aspect has the same meaning as the "that" aspect. In this manner, the meaning of "you are that" is the same as "I am brahman". The teacher says to the student - "you are that", you are that very brahman, and the wise student experiences "I am brahman".
 
Here, the I is not mixed with brahman, nor is the brahman mixed with I, to get at "I am brahman". Both are notions (bhaava). If the one who has inferior knowledge (alpajnya) mixed the I in brahman and takes that form, then who will say "I am brahman"? And if brahman mixes in I, then when was it not mixed? This is not a practice of action, worship or yoga samaadhi. This is because the "are" (asmi) aspect (pada) denoted reality, not any ritual. But yes, even without the knowledge of the synthesis of aspects (pada samanvaya), by repeating the thought flow of "I am brahman", the "samprajnyaata samaadhi" in the form of "asmitaa lambana" is attained. This statement does not even create impressions in the body or internal organ like a mantra, since these statements have no connection with any action. It is also not the case that asserting the I as the brahman is a self recollection (svayam paraamarsha), in reality both the I and brahman are without essence, they are void. In Vedanta, the meaning of this statement "I am brahman" is different than all of these objections.
 
I am, this is an eternal immediate knowledge. But "I am brahman", though the self is immediate, is an unknown. In fact, "I am not brahman", this is the knowledge. Brahman is known in the form of anther, in the form of an unknown non-immediate reality through various statements in scripture. The great statement "I am brahman" reveals that unknown non-immediate brahman as our known and immediate self. Through the means thought flow of the "I am brahman" statement, the unknown imagined disconnectedness experienced in the self gets cut. And the unknown-ness, otherness, non-immediacy gets cut. With this unknown-ness removal, the self-illumined awareness brahman is known and established as our own self.
 
"I am brahman" is the negation statement of all superimpositions that are ascribed on the self. I am the body, this is a natural superimposition. I am so-and-so, of this creed, this caste, this life stage, fair-dark-thin-fat, I am hungry, thirsty, I am wise, I am stupid, enjoyer, happy, I am sad, I am a soul, worldly, I am disconnected - all these superimpositions have been ascribed on the self by society, religion and scripture. When they stay, there is nothing wrong with their respective transactions, but the realization of the self is not possible, and then as long as ignorance remains, the entire world with its misfortune cannot be removed. "I am brahman" says that our "I" is of the form of superimposition in its meaning and transactions. This superimposed I-sense should be purified, and our I should be experienced in its form of pure witness awareness. For this, seer-seen, three-body, tristate, five sheath and contemplation of dissolution etc. process should be used. After that, with the "I am brahman" statement, that pure awareness self alone is experienced as devoid of all three distinctions, non-dual, in the form of existence consciousness bliss, all-substratum, since the nature of the pure self is this brahman alone.
 
"I am brahman" does not mean that the "I" referring to some person called Mohan or Sohan is brahman. This is not Vedantic knowledge, this is Virochana-based (aasuric) knowledge.
 
The Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad has this topic in it : Prior to the manifestation of the names and forms of this world, there was brahman. It knew itself as "I am brahman" and as soon as that happened, all this arose. Sage Vaamadeva know that "I only was Many, I alone became the sun". Even today, he who knows "I am brahman" becomes all this (Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad 1.1.10). In the Chhandogya, existence alone was prior to creation, in the Brihadaaranyaka it was brahman, and in the Aitareya it was the self. It means that what is existence alone is the aware self and it alone is brahman. By this alone is the oneness in meaning of the great statements "you are that" in Chhandogya, "I am brahman" in Brihadaaranyaka, "brahman is awareness" of the Aitareya established. The result of knowing "I am brahman" is that its knower becomes all. It means that the non-brahman-ness and non-all-ness of the self is proven by ignorance, and knowledge removes it. The self alone is all-substratum, all material, non-modified non-dual in essence, but everything is happening due to error (vivarta).
 
"That which is my I is the supreme self, that which is the supreme self is my I, and that which is the visible world also is non-different than the I (the self essence" - the revelation and means to this knowledge is made through the great statement "I am brahman". You will not gain this knowledge in heaven, nor in samaadhi, nor in emotion. For this, the great statement-created thought flow is needed here and now.

18.4 You Are That (Tat Tvam Asi)

"Tat" means sat or existence. The shruti says : "that which is tat is sat, that which is sat is tat". The warp and woof of this creation alone is existence. In the science of existence or sad vidyaa, that alone is the non-dual aware reality. This supreme form of Ishvara is brahman.
 
"Tvam" means the pure witness. This is the purified form of "I".
 
"You are that" means the purified "I" sense of every person alone is brahman. Your self, the witness, which appears as disconnected, and this "this-target" world which also appears disconnected, in reality are the same non-disconnected undivided non-dual entity. The substratum of this world which has been denoted as Ishvara in the scriptures is none other that you, to whom this world appears.
 
Have you seen dust particles in light? Here there are three things: light, space and dust particles. You, the seer of these, are the fourth thing. Now think, in the same manner, in the endless space, you are seeing all these planets in the light of the sun. In the endless space of your non-particularized reality, in the light which is your presence, these infinite disconnected entities are seen by you, think about this for a bit.
 
Those who accept that dust particles exist, are visible, and the particles are creating light, become followers of the Chaaravaaka school. Those who accept that all these particles are made of the same light become followers of Ishvara. Those who say that there are no dust particles, there is only one void substratum, become followers of the void or "shoonya" school. In their opinion, the self made of particles also does not exist.
 
But those who accept, and also know, that the non-particularized space which you are seeing as the substratum of these dust particles, that light in which you are seeing the particles, that all-substratum, all-illuminating light is you the seer self, and these dust particles are an erroneous perception of your own self, are followers of Vedanta. You are that!
 
The science of existence posits - "apart from existence, there is no other thing called the self". Its conclusion - "you are that". He who was before creation, will remain after dissolution, and in whom creation-dissolution appear in the middle, that alone is the self.
 
He who does not have a beginning or end does not have a middle, every present point is a middle point, then in that beginningless-endless reality, where will there be another beginning-middle-end world? "All this is our self alone".
 
First, using seer-seen discrimination, five sheath witness discrimination, three fold body witness discrimination, tristate witness discrimination, experience yourself as the pure witness. You are the anvil-like illuminator knowledge, beyond the body and all of its arrogations. This is the "you" aspect. But this is not the complete knowledge, since you experience a distinct creation on all four sides, the seer distinct from the seen, one seen distinct from another. The invisible is seen to have a reality, there must be a creator of this world, he is different than me, unknown to me - this experience is still intact in you. For this, the "that" aspect Ishvara's nature has to be investigated.
 
Through the process of cause-effect, substratum-superimposed, scripture-described "laya chintana" etc. worship leads to the true nature of the absolute, and its investigation becomes complete. After that, investigation into the great statement "you are that" becomes necessary. In it, there is a difference between the nature of the soul and Ishvara. Arguments that negate this difference and that assert the non-difference should be contemplated upon. In the end, if needed, then an undivided thought-flow into the meaning of non-difference should also be performed. For a dispassion-filled seeker, this leads to the dawning of the "brahmaakaara" or brahman-shaped thought-flow, his "I" becomes known to him as brahman. This is the Vedanta philosophy - whoever knows the indicated meaning of "you" and "that", knows the meaning of "you are that" by listening alone. The engagement into contemplation and meditation is only to clarify the indicated meaning. This is the wonder of Vedanta, hear "you are that" once and become liberated!
 
More on this topic is described in chapter 17, the science of existence.

18.3 Processes Of Proving Identity (Aikya Paddhatiyaan)

In the scriptures, there are four processes that illumine identity.
 
1. Adyaasa Paddhati (process of superimposition)
 
In the time of delusion, due to ignorance, two entities are called as one. Like "this is silver". Here, the "this" refers in fact to the oyster shell. That oyster shell appears as silver due to a delusion. To remove this delusion, we need a process of negation (baadha paddhati).
 
2. Baadha Paddhati (process of negation)
Due to superimposition, when object appears as another, then using this process of negation, by determining the identity, delusion or superimposition can be removed. For instance, "this is silver", this is a superimposed identity (aadhyaasika aikya). But if we say "this silver is an oyster", then by calling the silver an oyster, in the identity that was shown, silver is negated and oyster is non-negated. When in a statement, one aspect is negated and the other is non-negated, then there is identity of the process of negation.
 
"This is a snake" - this is superimposition. "This snake is a rope" - here, the snake aspect is negated, and by doing so, the rope aspect is non-negated. Both snake and rope are spoken of in the same noun case (adhikarana). Therefore, this technique is called "baadha saamaanaadhikaranya". Wherever the non-difference of the world and brahman is indicated in scripture, the meaning should be imbibed using this technique of negation equivalence. Like, "all this is brahman". Here, "all this", the world of names and forms, has to be negated, considered illusory. And "brahman" is non-negated. In brahman, this name-form world is being seen just like the snake in the rope, or silver in the oyster shell. "All this is the self" and several other shrutis should be understood using this process of negation.
 
3. Visheshana Visheshya Paddhati (process of adjective and source)
That identity which is proven by the non-distinct relationship between the attribute and its source is called the process of attribute and source. Like "blue lotus". Here, the lotus and its blue-ness have an identity. "Blueness" is an adjective, and "lotus" is the source, both are aspects of the same noun case. Therefore, this is "visheshana visheshya saamaanaadhikaranya" or adjective-source equivalence.
 
4. Mukhya Saamaanaadhikaranya Paddhati (process of primary equivalance)
When in a statement, both aspects are uttered in the same noun case, and there is literal identity in their primary meaning, then it is the process of primary equivalence. Like "He is that Devadutta". Here, a person seen in the present is shown to be identical to a person that was seen in the past. This is neither a process of superimposition (since it is the same person), nor a process of negation (since both the meaning of he and this are being imbibed), nor adjective source equivalence (one person cannot be the adjective or source of another person). Here, the Devdutta that was seen in the past is this person seen in the present, this is the notion. The differences between the place, time, dress, surroundings of both persons have to be discarded and the identity of their person-ness (their primary essence) has to be imbibed. Therefore this is an example of primary equivalence.
 
"You are that", "I am brahman", "this self is brahman", "brahman is awareness" - in all these great statements, the difference (antara) between the adjuncts of soul and Ishvara has to be discarded, and their identity in their existence-consciousness-bliss aspect has to be imbibed. Through "bhaaga tyaaga lakshanaa", this primary equivalence technique is demonstrated.
 
Synthesizing (samanvaya) the that and you aspects in you are that, the I and brahman aspects in I am brahman, the self and brahman aspects in the self is brahman, awareness and brahman aspects in the awareness is brahman, all of these are ascertained using this technique of primary equivalence.

18.2 Various Doctrines (Vaada Prakriyaa)

Various doctrines of Vedanta have been accepted to get at the meaning of the great statement "you are that". "Avaccheda Vaada" accepts the adjunct of space and first discriminates between internal organ-separated awareness (soul) and maayaa-separated awareness (Ishvara). Then, in the adjunctless (non-separated) awareness, it shows the identity of them both. In "Aabhaasa Vaada", the cause-adjuncted awareness and effect-adjuncted awareness are investigated and their identity is proven. "Drishti Srishti Vaada" investigates the states of the time of non-thought (avichaara) and the time of thought (vichaara) In the time of non-thought (avichaara kaalika), due to ignorance, we assume awareness to be non-immediate. That awareness with the adjunct of ignorance is the "that" aspect, and with the adjunct of the knower is the "you" aspect. In this manner, even with distinctions, all of these doctrines hold dear the identity of the self and brahman.

18.15 A Note On Doctrines (Vaada Prakriyaa Explanation)

"Drishti Srishti Vaada", "Bimba Pratibimba Vaada", "Avaccheda Vaada", "Aabhaasa Vaada" - these are the four main doctrines. Here are their highlights:
1. Drishti Srishti Vaada
This is also called "eka jeeva vaada". In this doctrine, there is no such thing as an unknown existence (ajnyaata sattaa). At the very moment of seeing (drishti), there is creation (srishti), not prior, not after. Seeing or knowledge alone is appearing in the form of creation. I am the body, I do not know anything, I am a knower, I am the self, I am Viraata, I am brahman, all these are knowledge alone. Whatever our knowledge is at one point in time, we are that alone. This is a time-dominant philosophy. That which we considered distinct from our self in the time of ignorance, it is our true nature in the time of non-ignorance (vidyaa kaala). For example, there is a dream seer during the dream state. He alone is the one and only soul. Every other soul appearing in the dream is not a different soul, it is just an appearance of another soul. Similarly, the self brahman is the real soul, everybody else who is appearing in the form of I and this are only appearances of souls. But here is the point. In the dream, we do not have the knowledge that these dream souls are appearances. We only get this knowledge after waking up. Similarly, when the soul awakes to the tureeya element, then the duality-filled world is seen as an appearance alone, but not in the state of ignorance. World, soul and Ishvara are the play of the one and only one true seer, the one soul. During the time of ignorance, the "I" which is experienced as a disconnected soul (you aspect) alone is experienced as the brahman (that aspect) in the time of knowledge. The world which creates a difference between the you and that is also the vision of the seer, in other words, non-different than the seen. In this situation, the distinction between the you and that is proven to be ignorance alone. And the non-difference is proven by knowledge.
 
In drishti srishti vaada, only two realities are accepted - absolute (paaramaarthika) and visible (praatibhaasika). The seer (self or brahman) has an absolute reality whose illusory nature can never be proven. The seen has a visible reality, similar to a dream, even if the seen is heavenly, worldly, anything. Whatever is seen is all an effect of ignorance and are appearing sue to the seer. The triad of means-target-observer is also an appearance just like in a dream therefore it is visible or praatibhaasika. The waking state, like the dream state, is non-essence (a taattvika). This doctrine is followed by the Maandookya Upanishad. By taking its refuge in the Maandookya Kaarikaa, "Ajaata Vaada" has been established.
 
2. Bimba Pratibimba Vaada
The Vivarana school and Ratnaprabhaakara support bimba pratibimba vaada. In this doctrine, the pure aware brahman is the bimba or the reflected form. In avidyaa or ignorance, its pratibimba or reflection is the soul and in maaya, the reflection is Ishvara. Maaya comprises three gunaas. The adjunct of the soul is ignorance, of the nature of impure or "malina" sattva, therefore the soul has limited knowledge. The adjunct of Ishvara is maaya, of the nature of pure sattva, therefore Ishvara is omniscient. Even though they are both reflections, they are not illusory, they are real. Therefore, the transactional distinction between the soul and Ishvara is real. But the pure aware brahman without adjunct, the reflected form, does not have any space for the distinction between soul and Ishvara. The identity contained in the great statement "you are that" has to do with the reflected form, not with the reflection. If you take ignorance and maaya to be the same thing, then the adjunctless brahman itself will be called Ishvara. So now, take a seeker with all of the six fold qualifications. When, through hearing, contemplation etc., he negates the adjunct of impure sattva, and experiences his reflected form nature (bimba svaroopa), then the distinction of soul and Ishvara goes away, even if it stays from a transactional standpoint.
 
3. Aabhaasa Vaada
In this doctrine, ignorance with substratum and with appearance (saadhishthaana saabhaasa) is the soul, and maaya with substratum and with appearance (saadhishthaana saabhaasa) is Ishvara. The soul has the adjunct of ignorance and effect, and it is impure sattva oriented. Ishvara has the adjunct of maayaaa and cause, and it is pure sattva oriented. The substratum of the soul is the anvil (kootastha) and that of Ishvara is brahman. Appearance, whether in ignorance or in maayaa, is illusory.
 
In this manner, there are three things on the side of the soul - the anvil substratum, internal organ-ignorance and the aware appearance (chidaabhaasa) (the reflection of the pure brahman awareness in it). And there are three things on the side of Ishvara - the brahman substratum, maayaa and the aware appearance in maayaa, which is Ishvara.
 
The anvil with aware appearance is the soul (you aspect), and brahman with Ishvara is the that aspect Ishvara. The identity of the you and that aspects in "you are that" is not literal. The purified form of the soul is the anvil witness, and the purified form of Ishvara is brahman. When you negate the cause and effect (avidyaa and maaya), the anvil itself is brahman, this is the identity between the that and you aspect. Panchadashee, Vichaara Saagara follow this doctrine.
 
Aabhaasa Vaada accepts three realities: Absolute reality - Both the anvil and brahman have one reality in this. The reflections of soul and Ishvara have a "vyaavaahaarika" or transactional reality, and both these reflections are proven illusory by knowledge. Ignorance has a visible or "praatibhaasika" reality which is destroyed by knowledge, even if the effects of ignorance like the internal organ and body etc. continue to be seen till the praarabdha of the body.
 
4. Avachheda Vaada
Here, appearance is not accepted. Awareness with a particularized (connected) internal organ is the soul. And awareness with the adjunct of the internal organ is the witness. In this manner, the awareness with particularized maayaa is Ishvara, and awareness with the adjunct of maayaa is brahman. The internal organ is the effect and maayaa is its cause. The literal meaning of the you aspect is soul, and indicated meaning is witness. The literal meaning of the that aspect is Ishvara, and indicated meaning is brahman. The "you are that" statement shows the identity of the witness and brahman.
 
All these doctrines are meant for the understanding of seekers, and are also meant for the specific level of the seeker. There is no insistence of any particular doctrine from the scripture. Scripture only intends to show the oneness of the self and brahman, and of the world and brahman. In all of these, ignorance and maayaa are kept in the middle, and for all, they are illusory confusions alone. This analysis should be conducted for other great statements also.

18.1 Synthesis Of Aspects (Pada Samanvaya)

Vedanta says - "tat tvam asi", you are that. The literal meaning of the "that" aspect is Ishvara, and of the "you" aspect is the soul. Does that mean that Ishvara alone is the soul? But he who is the cause of all, omniscient, omnipotent, all pervasive Ishvara, how can he be associated with one body which is a disconnected doer-enjoyer, joyful-sorrowful, worldly, limited power soul? This statement cannot be true. Either the shruti is saying something impractical, or the literal surface meaning is not the intended meaning. The first point cannot be the case, therefore we have to understand the deeper meaning.
 
Whenever the direct meaning of a statement does not make sense, we have to perform "lakshanaa", in other words, it is understood that the words in the statement are indicating a meaning. Lakshanaa means indicating. There are three types of lakshanaas : jahat lakshanaa, ajahat lakshanaa, and jahat ajahat lakshanaa or bhaaga tyaaga lakshanaa. "Jahat" means "cast off".
 
"Jahat lakshanaa" happens where the primary meaning of a word is cast off, and a related meaning is taken up. For example, a person wearing glasses is called "Hey glasses!". Here, the meaning is not "glasses", it means "person who is wearing glasses".
 
"Ajahat lakshanaa" happens where the primary meaning of a word is kept, and some additional meanings are added. For example, you say "eat a couple of morsels". Here, you want to ask a person to eat more than just a couple of morsels.
 
"Jahat ajahat lakshanaa" happens when a partial meaning is discarded and a partial meaning is retained. For example, assume that you melted a gold bangle and made it into a necklace. Now you show the necklace to a friend and say "this is that bangle". Here, you discarded the old name and form, as well as the new name and form, but retained the essence which is gold. You really mean to say "the gold in that is the gold in this". This is also called "bhaaga tyaaga lakshanaa".
 
Now, in the "you are that" statement, the bhaaga tyaaga lakshanaa is accepted. That which is the "that" (Ishvara) cannot become the "you" (soul) and vice versa. But if you cast off the name, form, adjunct and effect of both, and the awareness, existence, bliss essence in both of them is imbibed, then the you aspect and the that aspect is identical. In this manner, through the bhaaga tyaaga lakshana in the "you are that" great statement, the knowledge of the awareness element in both soul and Ishvara is expected.
 
The "you are that" great statement is part of the existence science (sad vidyaa) of the Chhandogya Upanishad. The meaning of this topic is explained in chapter 17. Here is its summary. The existence element at the root of this world, which is of the form of awareness, which is endless, it is not any non-immediate thing, it is no other. It is you your self. In the time of non thinking (avichaara), that other existence consciousnes that you have accepted, is you alone from the viewpoint of thinking. "You are that".
 
"That" means Ishvara. The knower of the five element-filled creation is Ishvara. Even without sense organs, he is the knower of everything, therefore he is omniscient. But the "you", the soul, knows only through the sense organs, therefore he is a limited knower. In this manner, by being a non-organ doer, Ishvara is omnipotent, whereas the with-organ doer only has limited power. Ishvara is happy without intellect, therefore, he is independently of the nature of happiness. The soul is happy with the help of the intellect, therefore accepts himself as a subservient happy natured individual. Ishvara's adjunct is beyond existence and non-existence, indescribably maaya which is the material cause of everything, therefore Ishvara is all pervasive. The adjunct of the soul is the body-senses-internal organ, which is an effect of maayaa, therefore he is disconnected. But, in both of them, there is no different in their substratum existence, and also, no difference in their illuminator consciousness. Therefore, from the point of view of existence, as well as consciousness, there is no different between the soul and Ishvara.
 
Non-conscious existence is only imagination, and non-existence consciousness is inconsistent. That is why what is consciousness is existence, and what is existence is consciousness. That which the Chhandogya shruti calls the substratum of all names and forms, that is called existence, and that is the consciousness-nature self. In this manner, existence is "that" and in that consciousness-nature, "I" am. This the meaning of the statement "you are that". The distinction between the soul and Ishvara is adjunct-created: The adjunct of effect in soul, and the adjunct of cause in Ishvara, microcosmic awareness soul and macrocosmic awareness Ishvara. In the adjunct alone do the minor knowing of the soul and the omniscience of Ishvara exist, otherwise both are the same aware entity.

18.0 Discrimination Of Knowledge Of Identity In Great Statements (Aikya Bodha Mahaavaakya Viveka)

The foremost intent of the Upanishads is the knowledge of the identity of the self and brahman. That is why these are called the great statements of the Upanishads:
"Prajnyaanam Brahma" (Aitareya Upanishad 5.1)
"Aham Brahmaasmi" (Brihadaarankaya Upanishad 1.4.10)
"Tat Tvam Asi" (Chhandogya Upanishad 6.8.7)
"Ayam Aatmaa Brahma" (Maandookya Upanishad 2, Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad 3.5.11)
Besides these, the statements that speak about the identity between the world and brahman, like "sarvam khalvidam brahma", "brahmaivedam sarvam", "aatmaivedam sarvam" are also placed in the category of great statements. This is because, if there is some other reality between the self and brahman, the identity of the self and brahman is not possible. In this chapter, an analysis of the meaning of these great statements is being presented.

17.6 Some Doubts And Answers Regarding The Consequence

Question: In the Upanishads, several types of worship are described. Studying those, it may be said that the knowledge of the identity of the self and brahman also is an aspect of worship-based rituals.
 
Answer: The consequence (samanvaya) of all Vedas is the knowledge of the essence. But this knowledge is not an aspect of any worship-ritual. This has to be understood. For the fulfillment of worldly and other worldly desires, there is a tendency of people to take refuge in some invisible existence or substance. Its result is the worship of deities. The qualified student of worship is one, and that of knowledge of brahman is another. The inquisitiveness of brahman arises in him who does not see happiness in small things. He who has become dispassionate towards the tiny, will only gain happiness from the huge (brihat) substance, he who only sees brahman as happiness. The name of the most huge substance is brahman. It alone is the bhooma. That which is the one in the many is the bhooma. In reality, without dispassion arising, there will be no inquiry into brahman, when worship of deities can happen with a small degree of inquisitiveness.
 
The happiness that is experienced in the small makes you subservient, makes you inert, since without identifying with the inert you will not experience happiness, even in its result, it will make you sad. The opposer of happiness is subservience and separation, that of awareness is inertness, identification with a real other, that of existence is perishability. That is why, if someone wants to seek happiness outside of the self, then he wants perishable happiness, he wants inert happiness, he wants subservient happiness. In reality, he is afflicted by the delusion of sorrow seen as happiness. That is why, after becoming dispassionate towards the happiness of action and worship, the inquisitor of brahman should take the refuge of a teacher for attainment of the knowledge of brahman.
 
To attain the knowledge of brahman from the words of the teacher, the inquisitor faces three refuges: self refuge, Ishvara refuge and means refuge.
 
After dropping everything and sitting down in one self, we will attain the supreme self naturally - this is the refuge of the self. Perform lots of worship, give lot of offerings to Ishvara, and being pleased, he will give us his knowledge - this is Ishvara refuge. We will catch hold of some such means that will give us result in the form of brahman knowledge - this is means refuge, like the practice of scripture, austerity, samaadhi, deity worship and so on. Self refuge is nothing but means refuge, only the direction of the means action is inward, and doership is not present. But both self refuge and means refuge do not have the capability to remove the delusion of doership and enjoyership. In Ishvara refuge, there is doership towards an invisible deity, it is not the means for immediate realization. But yes, this is the path of a beginner seeker.
 
The seeker who has attained dispassion from the minor is the foremost qualified student for the knowledge of brahman. He who takes the refuge of his intellect is a medium qualified student, and he who takes the refuge of an invisible deity is a lower qualified student of the knowledge of brahman.
 
Question: Is worship prior to the knowledge of the essence, or is it after?
 
Answer: It is prior, since after the knowledge of the essence, action, doer and result in the form of the entire world of duality is destroyed. That is why, no further ascribing or worship is needed. It is not even possible since that delusory knowledge of duality, once removed by the knowledge of oneness, will not come back again. Therefore, brahman or the knowledge of brahman is not the aspect of any worship ritual. Yes, there are some places in the Upanishad where the self has been described in statements of rituals, and for purposes of meditations, those mentions can be considered aspects of worship ritual. But, there are places where negative statements are used - it is beyond words, beyond touch etc., or where there is teaching of the oneness of the self and brahman like "you are that" etc., there, the teaching is not an aspect of worship, but only the description of realization of truth.
 
The credibility of the statements of Vedanta is not just in them being scriptural statements, but they are also borne of experience. The way in which the self is said to be brahman is also the way in which it is experienced, that is why they are means. Other statements of injunctions, in which there is no visible subject of the world, are means solely due to their coming from scripture. Those statements connected with the visible are proven by the experience of ordinary negation and assertion, that is why those statements are not means by themselves. Brahman is proven by scripture as well as by experience. Whereas ritualistic actions are only using scripture as means.
 
How is the credibility of Vedantic statements? Like "you are the tenth man". Every man is the tenth man in a group of ten fools, but due to foolishness they do not count themselves, but only the others. But when someone else comes in and points out "you are the tenth man", then immediate realization happens. Similarly, the self is brahman alone, even though it is immediate, due to ignorance it is as though indirect. Vedantic statements, by removing ignorance, take away that indirectness. The result of knowledge is the removal of ignorance, brahman is ever immediate.
 
Question: By Vedantic statemetns, the impressions of brahman are created in the mind, and through them, "the self is brahman" this knowledge is experienced. In reality, the self is not brahman. What if we say this?
 
Answer: It is not so. This is the special point about the science of the self. It neither creates impressions, and neither does it get created through impressions. Yes, all other sciences, being aspects of action, either create or get created by impressions. If you realize that you are a mass of knowledge, then that there is something called impression in knowledge, this notion of yours will be cut.
 
A pea contains five elements, as well as seedness which distinguishes it from wheat etc. It is due to this seedness alone that it grows, and produces fruits and flowers. But if we burn this pea, then the seedness of that pea will be destroyed, yet its elements remain. This means that existence (sattaa) does not have seedness. This seedness alone is impression (sanskaara). The seed can be burnt but not existence.
 
Similarly, the witness awareness is existence, it is without seed. In it there are no impressions of matter, action, emotion or ritual. So long as we are identified with the internal organ, these objects create impressions. After knowledge is gained, the internal organ, which is the basis for impressions, is itself negated. Then, how can the science of the self create impressions? And, if the self were created out of impressions, then for those impressions to be created, it would have had to be experienced some time prior, in that state, your internal organ would already have been negated, then the connection with me and mine would not have happened. But that is not the case, therefore the self is not created out of impressions.
 
"I am" is not an impression, it is an experience. I am a body, this is a natural knowledge. I am a human, this is social knowledge. I am a soul, this is scriptural knowledge. I am brahman, this is not a ascribing of brahman-ness on the I, but is the negation (adhyaaropa) of all natural, social, scriptural superimpositions. Therefore, the experience of the brahman-ness of the self is not created from impressions, but is indicated by the negation of all possible impressions.
 
The shruti said - all is the supreme self. Everyone heard this shruti, but each person responded to it differently. The action oriented person said - when all is the supreme self, one should serve everyone. The worshipper said - when all is the supreme self, then towards whom is there any attraction or aversion? One should keep the notion of the supreme self in everyone. The meditator said - when all is the supreme self, then one should practice the non-experience of the experienced diversity. The Vedantin said - Sir! what is there to do in this? The shruti is revealing the one truth. If all is brahman, then "I am brahman", "there is nothing different than me". Knowing this, he become fulfilled.
 
In this manner, the science of Vedanta is not an aspect of either action or worship. It is not created from impressions, nor does it create impressions. The means reveal their target. The target of Vedantic statemetns is the brahman-ness of the self, its target is not any ritual negation. If there is no doubt in your mind about the means (the shruti) and the target (brahman-ness) and there is no opposite thought (resistance) then you will attain the knowledge of brahman through the you are that staetment alone, since brahman is proven by scripture.
 
Question: So then, are we saying that brahman knowledge leads to liberation!
 
Answer: No, brahman knowledge itself is liberation. Through brahman knowledge, the ignorance of brahman-ness of the self is destroyed, and immediately, the light of liberation shines in the brahman-nature self. There is no interval between brahman knowledge and liberation. In this, experience and several shrutis are the means. For example:
 
1. The Mundaka shruti says that the knower of brahman becomes brahman (Mundaka Upanishad 3.2.9). Where the seer and seen are disconnected, there the seer of the pot is distinct from the seen pot. But where the seer is non-disconnected, but due to ignorance, a distinction between the seer and seen is experienced, there, when the non-disconnected self is realized (indicated by the negation of disconnectedness) there the seer becomes the seen. Due to ignorance, we accept ourself as the soul, and accept that brahman is distinct from us, the substratum existence. The knower is the you-aspect and the target is brahman, the that-aspect, but the shruti says - you are that. Disconnectedness is a delusion. When this is known, the distinction between the knower and the target vanishes, and the delusion of disconnectedness is removed, then the knower of brahman becomes brahman. There is only ignorance between the self and brahman, no action, no desire, no worship. Therefore, at the time of knowledge, "the knower of brahman becomes brahman".
 
During the time of ignorance, the subject of ignorance was brahman and its source was the I soul. When that very brahman was made the subject of knowledge, by saying I am that brahman, then it is seen that very brahman am I. Through knowledge, oneness between the source and subject, and ignorance was destroyed. Brahman is always of the nature of knowledge.
 
2. The second shruti of the Mundaka Upanishad says : After realizing that "paraavara" brahman, the knots of the heart are cut, all doubts are destroyed, and all actions end (Mundaka Upanishad 2.2.8).
 
"Paraavara" means the substratum of the entire moving and non-moving world. Realizing it means - seeing the all-self substratum, meaning Ishvara, in the form of one's own self. The "para" is the cause, it is Ishvara, and the "avara" is the effect, it is the world. The soul also is the effect with regards to Ishvara. Therefore, realizing the paraavara means seeing micro-macrocosm, soul-Ishvara and world-Ishvara, all as established in one's self-illumined self. What will happen by seeing in this manner? Ending of actions, destruction of doubts and cutting of the ignorance knot.
 
Even though you are the complete brahman, you make me and mine out of one internal organ, this is the knot of the heart. Delusion, superimposition, knot of inert and aware, all these are names for the knot of the heart. What are doubts? These also have ignorance at their root. They always come in pairs: Is it dual or non-dual? Are the self and not self one or two? Liberation is achieved through knowledge or action? Does knowledge lead to liberation or not? Is there another world or not? Is the self brahman or not? All these are doubts. What is action? The creator-created nature of desire and action is termed action here. Desire creates action, action creates desire again, the connection with desire-action leads to a repeated cycle of birth and death! This alone is action. Through knowledge, the knot of ignorance is removed, all doubts go away, and the connection with desire-action is destroyed to such an extent that the cycle of rebirth itself is broken. This alone is liberation.
 
These results of knowledge, which again is knowledge, definitely occur. There is no interval in the middle.
 
3. The shruti of the Taittireeya Upanishad says: One who knows the bliss of brahman is not afraid of anyone (Taittireeya Upanishad 2.9). Even Yaajnyavalkya tells Janaka of this same result, fearlessness : O Janaka, you have definitely attained to fearlessness (Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad 4.2.4).
 
Here, it seems to be the case that brahman and bliss are two different things, and their knower is the third thing. But in the Taittireeya shruti, bliss alone has been called brahman. It has also been said that the bliss brahman alone creates the world. This separation of bliss and brahman is only for grammatical reasons. Shruti 2.8 in that Upanishad analyzes bliss. There it is said as follows. If you are not ignorant, and you do not harbour any desire in your heart, then you will attain several times the unreachable bliss of humans spontaneously in the form of your self. It means that you yourself are of the nature of bliss. It is also said here that "brahman is truth, knowledge and bliss". The synthesis of all this is that you are the existence-consciousness-bliss-nature non-dual brahman.
 
When the knowledge that "I am the non-dual brahman" arises, then what will you fear? Fear is from another, from sorrow. Brahman is neither the other, nor the shadow of sorrow! "Brahman is fearless" (Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad 4.4.25). "Fear is of the other" (Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad 1.4.2).
 
The fear of death is the root of all fears. Through the knowledge of brahman, that fear goes away. Why should you worry about other fears? The existence is always imperishable. The wise person should not fear that they will become ignorant or mad, since in the form of awareness, these are not imagined! The intellect could be in samaadhi or in confusion, there is no fear. The wise person does not fear anything - neither object nor the absence of object, neither enjoyment nor absence of enjoyment, neither action nor absence of action! You have read this in the Chhandogya.
 
4. The shruti of the Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad says : "That soul alone knew itself that I am brahman, with this knowledge he became all". (Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad 1.4.10).
 
When the pot space is space alone, due to the adjunct of the pot, the name of space is pot space. Similarly, the soul is brahman alone, with the adjunct of body and internal organ, the name of brahman alone becomes soul. That brahman holding the name of soul knew itself. Knew what? Everyone knows their own self. The Chaaravaakas think of their self as the body or four elements. The Buddhists think of their self as momentary science. The Nyaaya school followers think of their self as the doer-enjoyer. The Saankhya and Yoga followers think of their self as the witness. The worshippers and atom school followers think of their self as a fragment of Ishvara. Everyone claims to know their self. The shruti said, we will make a constitution. He who knows based on that constitution, knows truly. The constitution says "I am brahman". If you know your self in the form of brahman, then the knowledge is correct. Devoid of the disconnectedness of space, time and matter, devoid of all three kinds of distinction, the undivided existence consciousness element brahman is me, and in me alone is this entire world creation shining. When you will know it like this, then you will know correctly. Its result? That I have become everything, this knowledge.
 
I am brahman, this knowledge is needed, but I am brahman, this arrogation is not needed. I am the body, I am the soul, etc. all these are arrogations. Their negation alone is required in the knowledge that I am brahman. Soul-ness is a delusion, "shrauta" is a delusion. This has not been accepted by looking at soul-ness. If you can see your soul-ness, then you are distinct from it to begin with. Soulness is the ascribing of the disconnected seen upon oneself, it is not our true nature.
 
In me, the brahman, this experienced creation, without existing, is being seen due to ignorance. In the vision of knowledge, experience is not distinct from the experience-self. Therefore, the world is non-distinct from me who is brahman.
 
5. Ishaavaasya Upanishad says : When he knows that "all beings are the brahman self alone", at that moment where can there by any sorrow or delusion for the one essence seer? (7)
 
In this manner, through the knowledge of brahman, the obstruction of the liberation-nature self is removed, it is not a command for any worship or action for liberation. This is because the shruti does not accept any interval between the knowledge of brahman and liberation. In action, there is always an interval between the knowledge of action and its result, which is the action itself, without which the result cannot be attained. But in brahman knowledge, liberation is attained at that very moment, this is the philosophy of the shruti.
 
The sage Vaamadeva realized that "I am brahman". As a result of this knowledge, he began to say that I alone was Manu, I alone am the sun (Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad 1.4.10). This is an example of all-self-notion (sarvaatma bhaava). From the viewpoint of the knowledge of the "you" aspect, the self alone is the illuminator and substratum of the mind and the eyes. There is no interval of effect between the knowledge of brahman and all-self-notion.
 
In this manner, Naarada prayed to Sanatkumaara to cross him over the ocean of sorrow, and only through hearing which is knowledge, Sanatkumaara did so (Chhaandogya).
 
Question: "Knowledge of brahman" means knowing brahman, In other words, there is an action called knowing brahman, which means that brahman is the object of knowledge.
 
Answer: The shruti points out brahman as objectless (avishaya). "That brahman is beyond the known as well as the unknown" (kena Upanishad 1.3). A visible object is known (vidita) and an invisible object is unknown (avidita). It could be something that is invisible at this moment like a foreign country, or invisible at all times such as heaven but has been spoken about. Brahman transcends the known and the unknown both. Then he must be a non-immediate (paroksha) deity who could also be beyond the known and unknown, deity is a name-form entity only from the reference of the worshipper. No, brahman is not non-immediate, the "I" is ever realized, therefore he is ever immediate. But even here, brahman is beyond any notion in which form the "I" is known as well as unknown. That which by which all these are known, how to know that? (Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad 2.8.14).
 
Now you say, if brahman cannot be an object of thought-flow, then it will forever remain unknown! Then the entire discussion of brahman is useless. And the scripture has been called the womb of brahman, that will also be refuted. Then it is not so. It has to be understood.
 
Even great Vedantins think that the effect of knowledge should happen in our body and internal organ. Like a treasure that is buried gives joy, at a minimum, there should be such joy. Then what you are saying is that brahman knowledge becomes a means of enjoyment for the body dweller, correct? This is just a state of arrogation of the body, not a state of brahman knowledge. The result of brahman knowledge is only the removal of ignorance, by which your imagined soul-nation is removed. Soul-ness means taking any fragment, any disconnected entity and calling it me and mine. A body which is 3.5 cubits long, which is 50-100 years old, which weighs 50-100 kilos, in it, the sinner and merit seeker which is calling it me and mine, joy-sorrow, accepting it as coming and going personality, thinking this as me and mine - all this is incorporated in soul-notion. This is a delusion, and by not knowing our true reality. Vedanta does not bring a shine to the face, does not bring money, does not remove disease. It only removes ignorance.
 
Brahman can only be objectless only when it is the self, the refuge of knowledge. That which illumines the object is objectless. Object, kinds of object, absence of object, that which illuminates these, that which knows objectness and objectlessness, that self is always departed from the object. Who knows? I know. Therefore I the self alone am objectless. That which stays away from objects and illumines them alone is objectless, the absence of objects is not called objectlessness.