More Advaita Questions (Part-1)

Note: This article is meant for intellectuals only

Part-1   Part-2   Part-3   Part-4   Part-5

O Learned and Devoted Servants of God,

In the spiritual discussion, the two persons discussing should have the co-operation with each other because both of them are jointly searching for the truth. Thus, the person questioning and the person answering are building up the search and their common aim should be only to find the truth. Whoever may find the truth should not feel like winner and the other person should not feel like a runner (loser). Both are equal and responsible for finding the truth. Both the runner and winner are rewarded with the gifts equally. Unless Arjuna asked the questions at every step, Krishna could not have delivered the Gita. The final discovery of truth should be the common goal to both because both are benefited by the truth. Unless this common goal is realized by both, the final realization of truth cannot result. The debate between Shankara and Mandana Mishra was of this nature. If both the persons take it in terms of success and defeat, the debate will never end and the truth is never exposed.

Both Shankara and Mandana Mishra were strong scholars of the scriptures. When both are scholars of the scriptures, why Shankara was in the right path and Mandana Mishra was in the wrong path? Both have tremendous knowledge of scriptures. Both have full knowledge. Both were convinced without any doubt in their own fields. Since knowledge is proportional to practice and since both have full knowledge, both have perfect practice in their own lines. Now when both have full knowledge and perfect practice, why is there difference between them and what is the necessity of such long debate between them? No one has any trace of ignorance in their lives regarding the scriptures. However, the difference is due to the right knowledge and the consequent right practice resulting in the case of Shankara, which is totally opposite and different from the wrong knowledge and wrong practice in Mandana Mishra. The difference is not in the quantities of scriptural knowledge but the difference is in the quality. Shankara has one ton of diamonds whereas Mandana Mishra has one ton of gravel stones. The reason for the difference in the quality is that Shankara got the right interpretation of the scriptures whereas Mandana Mishra got the twisted wrong interpretations of the scriptures. Therefore, you should not be impressed on the quantity of scriptural knowledge. Ravana had the full knowledge of all the scriptures but all his scriptural knowledge was only misinterpreted and twisted knowledge. Therefore, the point here is not to know the basic concept, which is not known. The point is to know the real interpretation of that which is known. If anyone concentrates on this point, the difference is appreciated and the right interpretation is selected by logic based on the experience in the world. The difference is not in the quoted scriptures but the difference is in the correct interpretation of the quoted scriptures. In arriving at the correct interpretation, you must accept the logic and infact, it is better to accept science, which is experimentally proved logic in rejecting the non-God items. If the item proposed as God is subjected to such experimentally proved logic instead of dry theoretical logic, whether the item is God or not God can be clearly understood. If the logic succeeds in proving it as non-God item, certainly that item is not God. If the logic fails, it can be taken as God. For such method of approach, the authority is the scripture, which says that God is above the logic (Atarkyah, Naisha Tarkena –Veda).

I am not refuting the Advaita philosophy of Shankara with reference to the then atmosphere surrounding Him. Without referring to this atmosphere, people have misunderstood Shankara. Thus, the present Advaita philosophy is twisted or misconceived concept of Shankara due to forgetting the then atmosphere. Shankara neither was wrong nor are the present Advaita philosophers, who enter into debate with Me are wrong. Shankara was not wrong because of the atmosphere. The present Advaita philosopher is also not wrong because he conceived sincerely the misconceived Advaita philosophy passed on to him by the middle brokers. The God and devotee are good but only the priest in between them is mischievous. Therefore, the present Advaita philosophers should not identify themselves with the twisted Advaita that is passed on to them. When I oppose the twisted concepts, they should not take My criticism personally because they are not the culprits of such twisted versions.

If you go to the time of Shankara, He was surrounded by Buddhists and Purvamimamsakas, who were totally atheists. His aim is to uplift them. He wants to convert the atheists into Hanuman, who has become God. The path is too long, existing between the two extremities. It is a long road from Kashmir to Kanyakumari. Yet Shankara took the challenge because He was a genius and God Himself. To reach the state of Hanuman, hundred steps exist. If Shankara tells the atheists to climb the hundred steps so that he can become God like Hanuman, no atheist will climb the steps. Therefore, the highest fruit that is to be given on the hundredth step is shown to the atheists in the first step itself. The atheists attracted by the highest result will climb the steps one by one due to the attraction. Attracted by the biscuit, the dog will climb every step and finally the dog will climb the hundredth step where the biscuit can be given to it. Therefore, Shankara planned a strategy for this purpose. You must understand Shankara as a preacher (Guru) here and not as a scholar. The scholar reveals the truth and goes away. He is not bothered about the upliftment of the student but the preacher concentrates practically on the development of the student. Therefore, we call Shankara as Acharya (Guru), who is the embodiment of affection on the humanity.

The only method to attract the atheist is to show the fruit of the final step on the first step itself. The first step is the acceptance of God. Shankara told the atheist that the atheist himself is God. This serves a double purpose in the very first stroke. Since the atheist exists and since the atheist is God, God must exist. Therefore, the atheist accepts the existence of God without any other way. Thus, there is no other way to make the atheist believe in God. Now the atheist is trapped because his egoism and jealousy on the external God is satisfied. Every human being has always the ambition to achieve something great. Here is the school, which says that you are the greatest Brahman. In Advaita philosophy, the word Brahman always stands for the Parabrahman or God and here I follow the same notation. It also says that you are already Brahman and the only way is to remember the truth, which was forgotten by you. How nice and convenient is this! Every human being will get attracted. Especially the atheist, who is suffering with egoism and jealousy must be also having excess of ambition. Therefore, the atheist is very easily trapped by Shankara. The atheist cannot go back because if you have become the king under any circumstances, you will not lose it. Therefore, the atheist, who has become Advaita philosopher, can never go back to atheism.

However, immediately the atheist will ask for the absence of the capability of designing, creating, maintaining and destroying the world.

Shankara made another trick in the next step. He told that Ishwara possesses such capabilities. He separated Brahman from Ishwara. Brahman is simple awareness that wished to create the world. The design, creation and destruction of world are assigned to Ishwara. In the state of Brahman, only the awareness that exists in all the living beings, which only desires, exists. Since the soul of the most ignorant human being is this basic awareness only, every human being is Brahman. Therefore, even the ignorant atheist is Brahman. This is the absolute state (Paramartha Dasha). Now, the atheist is the absolute God without any disturbance to his post. Shankara told that everything except this state is unreal due to the relativity (Vyavaharika Dasha). To prove this, Shankara showed an example of the unreal item with respect to Vyavaharika Dasha and He called it as the Pratibhasika Dasha. Thus, Brahman is in the state of absolute reality. Ishwara and this world are in the state of relative reality. The relative reality is an illusion with respect to Brahman. To prove this, He showed the illusion, which is unreal with respect to relative reality. Brahman is ultimate reality, rope is relative reality and the illusion of the serpent is the ultimate unreality. The rope is unreal with reference to Brahman but is real with reference to the serpent. The rope is unreal before Brahman as the serpent is unreal before it. Therefore, Ishwara and world became unreal with respect to Brahman. Such Brahman is the soul of atheist. Therefore, the soul of the atheist is the ultimate Brahman, which is the ultimate reality.

The atheists were satisfied and entered into the state of ultimate reality because their concept of atheism was not at all disturbed. There is no God other than himself. Shankara has ended the story here for sometime. The atheist, who has become the disciple of Shankara, got bored in this state because he is not respected by anyone in this world. Even an illiterate person like Kapalika is doing miracles and people are respecting him. The greatness is limited to the atheist himself. Even his colleague is not respecting him because he was also in the same state. Such state cannot satisfy the egoism and ambition of the atheist. He becomes jealous with the state of a low person like Kapalika. Now, he is interested to become Ishwara.

He asked Shankara like this “when the Brahman is Ishwara with respect to this world, why not I become Ishwara with respect to this world? When Brahman is myself, why not I be the Ishwara in the relative state? The absolute Brahman became Ishwara in the relative state. Then in this relative state (world), why not I become Ishwara?”

This has opened the real issue. When Brahman is becoming the controller–Ishwara in the state of relative reality, why the same Brahman is becoming the controlled soul in the same state of relative reality? By this, the atheist has entered the second part of real path of spirituality.

Now Shankara replied like this “When the ignorance (avaranam) is removed, you become Brahman. However, the effect of ignorance (vikshepa) still remains. As long as your body exists, such effect is inevitable. When this body is dropped, you will remain in the ultimate reality as Brahman”.

Atheist: I do not want that useless state of ultimate reality in which I only exist. I want to become Ishwara even if I stay in the relative reality.

Shankara: To get rid of this effect and become Brahman in the ultimate reality and also simultaneously to become Ishwara in the relative reality, you have to worship Ishwara.

Atheist: When I am Brahman in the ultimate reality, I must be simultaneously Ishwara in the relative reality. At least when I enter the relative reality, I must be Ishwara. For example, a police officer has come to the house after finishing the duty. He is playing with his children as a father. Even in that state, he is the police officer simultaneously because in such state, no other police officer works in that post. At least if he suddenly goes to the office, he acts as the police officer. Similarly, when I am Brahman in the ultimate reality, I must be Ishwara at least when I enter the relative reality. However, I am becoming peon in the office. Does this not mean that I am not Brahman in the ultimate reality also? If I am Brahman, I am simultaneously Ishwara in the other plane or at least I must become Ishwara when I enter the other plane. In such case, worship of Ishwara means that I am worshipping myself. It means that Ishwara is different from me.

Shankara: In the plane of relative reality, you are not Ishwara as we exist and see the same in the plane of relative reality (world). Certainly, you are the Jiiva and differ from Ishwara in world. However, the reason for such difference is that the effect of ignorance is very strong. It is very easy to become Brahman in the plane of ultimate reality because as soon as you know that you are Brahman, the ignorance is destroyed. Therefore, due to the strong effect of ignorance, you are still unable to realize that you are Ishwara. Therefore, you have to worship and meditate upon Ishwara to give you the realization of unity with Himself. In fact, you have become Brahman by such meditation on Brahman. When the Ishwara shows grace on you, the effect is removed and you become Ishwara with the grace of Ishwara (Ishwaranugrahadeva). Brahman is Ishwara and the soul simultaneously in this world.

The Atheist started worshipping Ishwara. Shankara warned that the worship should be service in practice and should not have any desire including the desire to become Ishwara. Hanuman is an example for this. Now the atheist forgot his goal and started serving Ishwara. Finally, he became Ishwara like Hanuman. Actually, becoming Brahman is Atma Yoga and after that, you have to serve the Lord without any desire. You should treat such service itself as the fruit. Shankara brought this ultimate state in the beginning itself and showed it as the biscuit for the dog to climb the steps. The biscuit in the first step is called as Brahman. The biscuit in other step is called as Ishwara. The responsibility of a preacher is to uplift the student by using even some tricks, if necessary and not to reveal the truth straightly and spoil the student. Therefore, a preacher is like mother and not a mere scholar. The mother tells some lies so that the child eats the food. The mother tells the child that if the child eats the food, the moon will come into the hand of the child. The child believes and eats the food. Then the child asks for the moon. The mother will bring a mirror and show the moon in the hand of the child. Now, do you mean that the mother has cheated the child? Such lies from the mother are not sins. The child may misunderstand the mother due to ignorance but will realize the benefit of the truth in course of time.

Most of the human beings are the patients of viral fever caused by bacteria, which are egoism, jealousy and ambition. The network of Shankara traps most of them since egoism is satisfied because the human being is said to be God. The jealousy is satisfied since every human being is God, and therefore, no human being is greater than he is. The ambition is satisfied because the highest God is achieved in just one minute. The laziness to do the effort is also pacified because the human being has become Brahman as soon as this point comes to the notice.

We do not regret for this because if they follow this twisted path of Shankara, they are sure to reach Brahman even in the curved path. Whether the river is straight or curved it reaches the ocean only. Thus, the Advaita philosopher is far better than the atheist because he stepped onto the spiritual path. The beginner always is ignorant and the highest fruit must be shown in every step. The Gita says that ignorance is inevitable in the beginning. The tradition is built up with this psychology. It is said that if you utter the name of the river Ganga, then itself all your sins are destroyed and you will reach the Shiva Loka. There are several steps after this. You have to go to Varanasi, take bath in Ganga, worship Lord Vishwanadh, become a devotee, and get the divine knowledge from Sadguru about the Lord etc. The above said fruit can be achieved only in the final step. However, the fruit is shown in the first step itself to attract the person exploiting the attitude of getting the highest fruit with no effort. It also serves as an encouragement for the person to climb the first step from the ground.

Curved River into Straight River

What I am trying is to change the curved river into Straight River so that the time of journey is reduced. Therefore, I am revealing the twist. The first part is attaining the self, which is the pure awareness present in the human body (Atma Yoga) by realizing the superimposition (Adhyasa) of self on the body and by knowing the real nature of the self, which is pure awareness. By this, one is detached from the body and the worldly bonds. He becomes very strong in mind due to detachment from attractions causing worries and tensions. Now he is eligible for the Paramatma Yoga, in which the Lord in human form is recognized to serve Him in His mission. In doing the service, a strong mind with full determination and complete detachment from the worldly bonds is required. Such a state can be obtained by Atma Yoga. In doing the service to God, one should not aspire for any fruit because the service to God itself is the fruit. God does not require the service of anybody. The service is only for their upliftment. Therefore, serving God is serving themselves. For such real devotion, which is proved by service, God gives anything. Such devotee can become even God or even become the master of God. Hanuman got Atma Yoga from sun, who was His Guru. Then He recognized the Lord Rama and joined His service without aspiring any fruit. He became God because He is made the future creator of this universe. The Veda says that He, who creates also, maintains and destroys this universe. Therefore, becoming creator means becoming maintainer and also destroyer. That means Hanuman became God. Radha became the master of God. However, neither Hanuman nor Radha aspired for any fruit and these fruits are given by God by Himself as per His wish only. In order to attract the atheist, He has brought the second part into first part as an instrument to achieve Atma Yoga. When the proper time comes, He will take out the second part from the first part and stretch it in its normal place. The devotion and service are brought as instruments to achieve the grace of Ishwara in order to attain the Atma Yoga completely.

If you carefully analyze, you can reveal the twist and understand the truth. Several people will not like this because their egoism, jealousy and ambition are not pacified. However, a few people, who conquered these obstructions through rituals or social service, in which the human form as a statue or the human being directly is served. If these obstructions are already absent, rituals or social service are not necessary. After attaining Atma Yoga (Yoga as called today) directly from the sun, Hanuman joined straightly into the service of the Lord because in Him these obstructions did not exist.

Meaning of Brahman

The word Brahman is very dangerous and most complicated. Therefore, Vyasa started with the debate on the meaning of this word Brahman in the first Brahma Sutra. Any greatest item within the limited limits of its category can be called as Brahman based on its root meaning. The absolute Brahman created the primary energy, which is the space in its finest form (Tat tejah…, Atmana Akasah…–Veda). No soul can cross this primary energy or space under any circumstances. Even the science also says that any intelligence however much it may be sharp can never imagine beyond the space. Advaita philosophy also says that Brahman is beyond space. Then, how can you even imagine Brahman? When you cannot know or imagine even Brahman, how can you say that you are Brahman? The limits of your knowledge cannot cross the space. In such case, how can you claim that you are Brahman, which is beyond dimensions of space? How can you say that you are something about which you do not know or even imagine? If you say that you know Brahman, it means that Brahman is an imaginable or knowable item defined by the three-dimensional space. Therefore, there is a fundamental self-contradiction in your own claim that you are Brahman.

We are unable to understand that how Ishwara is different from Brahman or vice-versa. You are speaking about the state of absolute reality (Paramarthika). Tell Me whether this state is above the dimensions of space or within the dimensions of space? If it is above the space, you cannot even imagine about this state. If it is within the dimensions of the space, then it is in the world only, which is not absolute reality since it is only relatively real. Therefore, you are telling that you are Brahman, which is beyond space in the state of absolute reality, which is also beyond the space. Is it not a double foolish statement? You are speaking about the state of absolute reality, which is above the space, while yourself and the limits of your imagination cannot cross the spatial dimensions i.e., the boundaries of the world. Neither yourself nor your imagination can enter into that state of absolute reality. Therefore, you are not authorized even to imagine that state and how funny is it if you say that you are in that state? If you say that you are in that state, such state imagined by you is within the dimensions of space and which means that such state is in this world itself. We do not mean that Brahman, which is beyond space, does not exist at all and we do not mean that such state of absolute reality does not exist at all. Brahman beyond space exists and such existence itself is the state of absolute reality. Except this information about the existence of Brahman and its state, no other information is available even to angels as spoken by Lord Yama to Nachiketa (Kathametat Vijayaniyam…, Astiityeva… Veda). The Gita confirms this point (Mamtu Veda Na…). There are several Vedic statements, which straightly say that Brahman is beyond words, mind, intelligence, logic and imagination.

Therefore, there are only two items. The first item, the creator, is the unknowable, which is beyond the limits of imagination of any soul. The second item is the creation, which is the created object that is defined by the dimensions of space (fine energy) as the ultimate reality of the creation. Therefore, when you say that you have understood Brahman, such Brahman can be only the space or fine cosmic energy, which cannot be crossed by your imagination even on doing penance for millions of years. Now, you can call this primary energy or space as Brahman because the Veda and the Gita have used this word to mean several greatest items in their corresponding categories. Out of all these greatest items, the cosmic energy is the most meaningful sense of this word, because it satisfies all the aspects of Brahman mentioned in the Veda. All the items of the world are generated, maintained and dissolved by this cosmic energy (Yatovaa… –Veda). This entire world is essentially cosmic energy (Sarvam Khalu –Veda). Even the soul (pure awareness) is only this cosmic energy because in the absence of supply of food, which generates energy, the awareness in the living being disappears, which is called as death. This means the energy is transformed into awareness (Annat Purushah- Veda).

Now, the four Mahavakyas can be clearly understood even if you mean that the words Myself, yourself, he or she and Prajnanam (if you take this word in the sense of mere awareness only) are this cosmic energy or Brahman. In this context itself, you can clearly understand that the transformation of awareness into energy or matter is impossible. If that is possible, the awareness can transform itself into heat energy and a fasting person should not die by losing the body-heat. The awareness can only transform into a feeling or quality. In such case, how can you think that awareness is Brahman, which is the source of creation? All the Vedic statements oppose such way of thinking. You can say that awareness is the soul because the soul is made of awareness. It is not a special point because it is as good as saying that a ring is made of gold. You can say that awareness can only wish to create the world. Except this one point, all other aspects are opposing the awareness to be called as Brahman. Ofcourse this point stands as a disadvantage for the cosmic energy also because it is inert. Therefore, for this single reason, we reject the cosmic energy to be called as the absolute Brahman. Moreover, the cosmic energy is requiring the dimensions of space for its definition because the electromagnetic radiations (energy) propagate in space. Therefore, the cosmic energy or space cannot be Brahman, which is beyond space. As you see, the awareness also cannot be Brahman for many reasons. The final output of all this is, neither cosmic energy nor awareness could become Brahman because both these are defined by spatial dimensions existing in this relatively real world. If you say that you are the unknowable or unimaginable Brahman, it means that you do not know yourself. Only a person, who is highly intoxicated with heavy drink, does not know himself.

You say that Ishwara is in relative reality.

This means that the Ishwara is definable by spatial dimensions. However, as we see no such relative item can satisfy the expected nature of Ishwara. The cosmic energy cannot wish to create. The awareness cannot create. If you can associate the divine will with cosmic energy, then the possibility is opened. However, here also the unimaginable potentiality to do this wonderful design is expected. A simple combination of mere awareness and energy cannot do this work. The human being is such a combination (assuming that the matter of the gross body is energy in terms of science) and it cannot do this work. Even an angel, which is the direct combination of energy (here energy means energetic form) and awareness cannot do this work. Therefore, the unimaginable God must be embedded in this combination to do this unimaginable work. Now, what is Ishwara in this combination? Is it the external energy, which is the medium required for you to imagine Ishwara? If so, even the isolated energy should be Ishwara. It is not so. Is the will (awareness) Ishwara? If so, the soul should do such work. It is impossible for the soul. Is the unimaginable God, Ishwara? If so, Ishwara is also unimaginable like God and cannot be in the relative reality. Therefore, Ishwara is God possessing such unimaginable potentiality embedded in the medium of energy and awareness. Now, there is no occasion when God is not having this potentiality, whether the universe is created or not. Even if you call this potentiality as an associated characteristic (tatastha lakshnam), it should be treated as the inherent characteristic (swarupa lakshnam) for two reasons. The first reason is that such potentiality cannot be separated from Brahman. The second reason is that such potentiality does not exist in any other item. If the bell-belt is not separated from the cow at any time and if the bell-belt is not present in the neck of any other cow then, the bell-belt can be treated as the permanent identity mark of that cow.

When the first Brahma Sutra says that Brahman is discussed here, the second sutra says the Brahman is that, which creates, maintains and dissolves this world. Therefore, even if the creation is not done, Brahman has the potentiality. The police officer, who came from the office and is spending time with his children as a father, can give the firing order on an urgent phone call. He need not go to the office and then give the order. If the police officer is in deep sleep, such potentiality may not be expressed. If that is the case with Brahman, your absolute reality means the ignorance of deep sleep! You cannot separate Brahman and Ishwara under any circumstances because neither yourself nor your imagination can cross the boundaries of this relative reality. Only, from the point of the external medium (energy and awareness) you are treating Ishwara as the relative item. Thus, you cannot touch the real and internal concept of Ishwara by any extent of imagination. Whenever you start talking, all your words indicate the items of this relative-real world only. With the help of such words, how can you talk about the absolute Brahman or its state? The Veda says that except the realization of the existence of such Brahman, nothing can be said about it through words. The existence of such unimaginable Brahman or God (better to call Parabrahman, since the word Brahman is a very general term), God is proved through the unimaginability that is indicated through the knowable items and events. Here, the unimaginability is not imagined but only the existence of unimaginability is realized.

Unimaginable Design of The World Not Possible to Soul

The unimaginable design of this world is not possible to any soul. This single point is sufficient to say that the absolute Brahman cannot be any soul. Especially the creativity is unique with God or absolute Brahman. The soul can imagine new concepts but parts of such new concepts exist already in this creation. Suppose you have imagined an animal with eight legs and two tails. The animal, legs, tail are the parts, which already exist in this world. However, in the case of God before the creation of this world, no part existed. Therefore, the imagination of this design of world, which is the original creativity, is impossible for any soul. The only one hope that you have to say that awareness is God is also lost. The implementation of such impossible design is completely out of the scope of awareness. It comes in to the scope of the cosmic energy only. The dissolution of the world by the cosmic energy is also possible. Therefore, the materialization of the world and destruction of the matter come under the scope of energy only, which are completely impossible to awareness. The awareness cannot create even an atom or cannot destroy an atom. Ofcourse, by this, we do not say that the cosmic energy is the absolute Brahman. The reason is that the cosmic energy cannot design this world. The cosmic energy, being the creation, is the created item. Some other item, which is beyond the cosmic energy created it, since it cannot create itself. Therefore, you are unable to attain the absolute Brahman even in your imagination because every imaginable item shows some defects and fails to become the absolute Brahman. By such process of elimination of the items of creation, based on logical analysis, the Vedic sages have arrived at the conclusion that the absolute Brahman cannot be known (Neti Neti…). Its existence is obtained only from the scriptures, from the inference of cause to this wonderful world and from the experience given by the human incarnation through unimaginable knowledge and unimaginable miracles.

The followers of Shankara, who are the Advaita philosophers are highly intellectual and are very much talented in creating twists because Shankara is a genius in creating such twists. However, the difference between Shankara and His followers is that Shankara created the twists to uplift the atheists to the highest state of spiritual goal. Thus, the flashes of His intelligence are used in proper direction for the spiritual welfare but the twists of His followers are used in destroying themselves without the spiritual progress. You should not follow the Lord in every aspect. One day, Shankara took wine. His followers also took the wine because they were feeling that they were also Brahman similar to Shankara. Next day, He swallowed the molten lead but the disciples could not do so. Then Shankara told “Shivah Kevaloham,” which means that only He is Shiva. The disciples fell on His feet praising Him as the Lord. We have constantly used the word “unknowable” in the sense that it cannot be known even by imagination. The word Ajneya (Unknowable) is famous in this sense only in the usage. A word is fixed in a particular sense (Rudhi) and it should not be used in the other sense. Thus, the word unknowable is exactly the same as unimaginable. Fearing the sidetracks of the word unknowable, I have always used the word unimaginable also along with it to stress the particular sense. The Advaita philosopher here made a wonderful twist and tilted the whole theory in diagonally opposite direction. My friend has resolved another meaning based on the derivable meaning from the root (Yoga) as called in grammar. The other meaning derived is that the word Ajneya means, which is not Jneya. Now, He has brought the sense of the word Jneya from the triputi, which means the object. Now, he says that the subject (Jnata) is not the object. Hence, the subject is Ajneya. Since the self is not the object and is only the subject, the self becomes Ajneya (because the subject is not the object). Therefore, he maintained that the self is unknowable and therefore, it is in the state of absolute reality. I thought of referring the point from Shankara, who deals with two items only, which are knowledge (Jnanam) and the object (Jneya), since the subject also happens to be the object of some other subject. Of course, even then, My friend will say that the knowledge is not the object and therefore, the knowledge, which is the soul, is also Ajneya. Such intellectual twist, which is against the tradition of grammar (Yoga Rudha), cannot be accepted even in theory. In practice, such twists are only destroying the soul by increasing the egoism.

My friend is distinguishing between Atman and Jiiva. He is differentiating the Jiiva from Ishwara, who are in the relative reality.

I cannot control Myself without laughing on such statement. My friend is always jumping to catch the sky. When the soul (Atman) or Jiiva cannot cross the spatial dimensions of this relative reality (world), how can he cross Ishwara? Ofcourse, he can clearly distinguish between Atman and Jiiva since both are in the relative reality only. The pure awareness, which is like standstill water, is like Atman. The waves in the water, which are the qualities tied up as a bundle, is called as Jiiva. In a realized soul after attaining the Atma Yoga, the awareness can be without vibrations and can be called as Atman without Jiiva, But, when Jiiva is taken, the Atman is invariably involved in it. If you take the ring, the gold is taken. If you further analyze deeply, the waves are kinetic energy. The awareness is essentially energy, which is also dynamic. Thus, basically both are work forms of energy only and there is no difference between Atman and Jiiva. Thus, you cannot isolate Atman from Jiiva and Brahman from Ishwara. You may isolate Atman from the Jiiva in the case of the realized soul because both are relative items. However, Brahman being the absolute item, even an attempt to isolate Brahman from Ishwara becomes meaningless. You can isolate two imaginable items but you cannot isolate the unimaginable item from the imaginable item.

Brahman is the unmodified cosmic energy charged by the absolute Brahman or Parabrahman or God. Before charging this cosmic energy, a very little part of this cosmic energy is modified into cosmos. Thus, Brahman is not charging the universe. The cosmos is maintained by His will. Therefore, the changes in the universe are not touching Brahman. Brahman is the spectator (subject) and the cosmos is the scene (object). Since Brahman neither is in the cosmos nor is its direct basis, the status of Brahman as a separate spectator is not disturbed (Sakshi Cheta Kevalo Nirgunascha –Veda). The world is made of qualities and Brahman, the spectator, is beyond qualities (The word nirguna in the Veda denotes this.). The will in the cosmos is just a property of awareness, which is controlled by the presence of nervous system and brain. Therefore, the souls in the cosmos are objective only and not subjective. Therefore, the knowledge of the soul by such limitation becomes limited only. The knowledge or awareness is a work form of energy and its source is God. God is the source of all items of the world and there is no specialty of the will or knowledge having absolute Brahman as the source. The will does not identify God as awareness. If you do that, all the other properties, which are in the world being generated from God only, will make God as their corresponding items. The Brahma Sutra says (as said by the Veda) that God eats the entire world at the end. The fire is called as Sarvabhakshakah, which means that He eats everything. Then God should be fire (Atta Charachara Grahanat –Brahma Sutra).

Suppose a man by name Pandey is an officer. Another man by name Mishra is a peon in his office. Both Pandey and Mishra are men. Therefore, you may say that Pandey and Mishra are one and the same man (The word man here is taken in the sense of race or Jati according to the ancient Indian logic.). Now, you say that Mishra is Pandey. Slowly you will say that Mishra is the officer and Pandey is the peon. This entire logical building becomes meaningless. First of all, the entity called race does not exist practically apart from the individuals. There are only two items here, who are Pandey and Mishra. There is no third item called as man. This itself opposes your effort in the fist step itself. Similarly, Brahman is Ishwara, who is the controller of the universe. Atman or Jiiva is the controlled item in the creation. Apart from Atman (or Jiiva) and Ishwara, where is the Brahman like the man as the third item apart from Pandey and Mishra? The non-existing man is as good as the non-imaginable Brahman even though Brahman exists. For all practical purposes, God cannot be touched directly. You cannot use even a word to indicate God with positive sense because the nature of God is completely unimaginable. Pandey left the office, came to his house and is spending time with his family. Similarly, Mishra also left the office and is spending time with his family. Now, you take the similarity in both and say that both are one and the same and indicate both by one word “the man”. Similarly, you have brought Ishwara into this absolute reality and also the soul into this absolute reality and call both of them by the single word “Brahman”. The essence of all your philosophy is this only. If you carefully analyze, this logic becomes meaningless. Even if Pandey returned to his home, if some issue of emergency is referred to him, he will act as an officer and will reply to it in the house itself. Pandey retains the potentiality of officer in him even without being in the office. However, Mishra cannot do the same and how can you claim that Mishra is Pandey? You cannot separate Pandey from the officer because when Pandey is in the house, nobody is acting as the officer in the office. Pandey as an officer in the office can also answer some issue conveyed by his wife from the house. Therefore, Pandey and the officer are inseparable. Similarly, Mishra and the peon are inseparable (in this simile only the time of their tenure in their post should be considered since Brahman never retires from the post of Ishwara). Therefore, assuming that both the states of absolute reality and the relative reality are imaginable and attainable state by the soul, still the oneness of Pandey and Mishra could not be achieved. How can you imagine the unity when the absolute reality is beyond space and unimaginable?

Initial Remarks on Your Concepts

Before giving the answers to the questions, the following remarks on your concepts are projected so that you will come down to a neutral stage to grasp our theory after realizing the defects in your own arguments. Our theory cannot enter if you are biased with your own theory without doubting your own points. When you understand the remarks on your points, you will come to a middle neutral state, which is congenial to receive the truth without any prejudice.

1.  You say that the serpent visualized in the rope is Pratibhasika. The rope is Vyavaharika. The Brahman is Paramarthika. The rope is real and the serpent is unreal. Similarly, you can realize that the rope is unreal if it is resolved into threads. The thread can be unreal if it is resolved as cotton material. If the cotton material is resolved you can find atoms. The atom can be resolved into subatomic particles. These particles can be resolved into energy but you cannot resolve the energy. Space is the finest form of energy. You cannot resolve the space because you cannot go beyond the space. Therefore, how can you get God as Paramarthika in such chain of relative items? You have to stop with the space or energy only. You cannot achieve God by such analysis of the chain of relative items. The final item, energy, can be your Paramarthika. How can you give examples, which consist of two items that are defined by space and time as a simile to God and the world, when one of the two items i.e., God is beyond space? The link between two relative items (Adhyasa) cannot be the link between the absolute and relative items. You cannot say that the blue colour is superimposed on the unperceivable space (refer to the beginning of the commentary on the Brahma Sutras by Shankara). Here the space is the final relative item in the world and how can it be the absolute item? Moreover, space is perceivable because when nothing exists, we say that vacuum (space) exists in a room. However, why Shankara has taken this concept as His theory? The answer for this is that at the time of Shankara, the development of logic was limited to a particular level only, in which it is thought that space is vacuum or nothing (Gaganam Shunyam). Based on that level, Shankara has built-up this twist for the sake of atheist to convert him into theist. Today, the logic (science) is very much developed and is more accurate due to experimental verification. Today, it is proved that space bends as per the special theory of relativity and thus, space is not nothing but a form of energy only. Now based on this concept the twist is revealed because today the atmosphere consists of several theists and there is no need of any twist. The same God revealed knowledge to Shankara at that time, who is revealing this knowledge through this human body. God is not educated more and more in course of time because He knows the total knowledge of the future also at any time. His knowledge is beyond time. However, the knowledge of the souls has the dimension of time and therefore, becoming more and more sharp. The sharpness of this knowledge is not due to any change in God but due to the change in the souls. The same God is revealing deeper and deeper knowledge according to the more and more sharpness of the knowledge of the receiver.

2.  The energy is absolute (Paramarthika), matter (rope) is relative (Vyavaharika) and the serpent (unreal) is illusionary (Pratibhasika). In the chain of such relatively true items, you can have only two concluded items, which are absolute and relative only. Thus, rope is absolute and the serpent is relative. The energy is absolute and the rope (matter) is relative. Therefore, there is no need of the third item as illusionary in this chain. The first item of this chain can be absolute, which is God and the last item (unreal serpent) can be called as illusionary. However, during the illusion, the unreal serpent is experienced as real and hence, it can come under the relative category. The first item in this chain (God) is not obtained by the logical analysis of this chain and therefore, it cannot be an item, which is defined by the dimensions of space. The existence of the first item is from scripture, from inference and finally from the experience given by the human incarnation. Since only the existence is experienced, God remains unimaginable (Astiityeva –Veda). Therefore, there is no contradiction in realizing the existence of God as the first absolute item. However, the objection is only about the knowledge of the nature of God because the Veda and the Gita say that God cannot be touched even by logic, which is the cream of knowledge.

3.  How can you fix the word Brahman in God only based on the Brahma Sutras, when the Veda and the Gita, which have come from the mouth of God have used this word to mean various greatest items in the relative fields? The Brahma Sutras were written by sage Vyasa and cannot be superior to the Veda and the Gita because Vyasa Himself praised Krishna as God in His own writings. The Veda said food, life, mind, intelligence, bliss, knowledge, space etc., as Brahman. The Gita used the word to mean the Veda, which is the greatest scripture. Even the Brahma Sutras say about the enquiry of Brahman, which does not mean the knowledge of Brahman (Brahma Jijnasa). Vyasa is in line with the Vedas because the Veda also says that scholars try to know (enquire) Brahman (Brahmana Vividishanti). The word Vividisha means only enquiry and does not mean the knowledge of Brahman. Every word should be used after realizing the meaning. The word gives the meaning of the known object only and not the knowable object. Therefore, you cannot use any word for God. The word Parabrahman means that, which is beyond Brahman. It does not give the meaning in anyway. It only gives the existence of something, which is not Brahman. Therefore, Brahman is a known item. In the Brahma Sutras also, the word Parabrahman is indicated by the word Param (Paramabhidhanat). The devotee reaches Brahman and the Brahman (cosmic energy) ends in God. The cosmic energy by itself cannot do anything since it is inert. It can only do anything by the will of God. If you identify God as awareness due to will, you have to identify God as every item in this world because every item, every property of the item and every action are only from the God, which is the chief source. Thus, you can take the meaning of the fifth Brahma Sutra like this: Due to will of God, the inert energy (Brahman) cannot be taken as God, because in the Veda, the will is attributed to God. However, if you are very particular of the word Brahman only as God, then you have to take the inert energy (upadhi) charged by God as Brahman. In that case, due to the presence of God, the energy could create the universe. In such case, since the God is identified with the inert energy, you can take the will of God as the will of the medium (upadhi) also. However, a problem here is that Brahman is used to mean various items and the confusion comes with that word. Parabrahman is the best word, which cannot be treated as word since it does not mean any item directly. Shankara and Krishna have mentioned this word very clearly and even the Brahma Sutras have used this word in short form i.e., Param.

4.  The rope is a form of matter and the illusionary serpent (imagination) is a form of awareness. Therefore, both the forms are based on the two relative items called as matter and awareness respectively. If the basis is lost in both cases, the form cannot maintain its reality. Both matter and awareness are modifications of inert energy. Therefore, there is no difference between the illusionary reality (Pratibhasika) and the relative reality (Vyavaharika). In both the cases, both the states exist equally. Of course, the illusionary state serves as an example to preach the relative state.

5.  The four Mahavakyas can be interpreted very easily if you take the meaning of the word Brahman as the infinite cosmic energy. Since every item in this world like matter, awareness etc., are the modifications of the cosmic energy only, to say that every person (Myself, yourself and that person) is Brahman becomes very convenient. Here the convenience is that you need not limit the word Brahman to the inner soul only. If the meaning of the word Brahman is awareness only, then you have to limit the word Brahman to the inner soul only. However, if you take the inert energy as the meaning of the word Brahman, both the external gross body and internal soul are modifications of inert energy only and hence, both can be Brahman. Whenever we use the word Myself, yourself and he or she, the word means the total personality, which is both internal and external. You can also co-relate the Vedic statement that Brahman creates, maintains and destroys the world. You can take the word Brahman to mean the inert energy as the material cause. A separate reference to the cosmic energy is also given in the Gita under the name Brahman only (Mahat Brahma). You can easily apply the Vedic statement that says that this entire world is Brahman (Sarvam Khalu…), since all the items of this world are the direct modifications of inert energy only. When the question of design comes, the Parabrahman, which is the source of will, can be referred. Brahman can be taken as also the source of inert energy charged by Parabrahman. Through medium, He is the material cause (Upadanam) and the will can be from Himself (Nimittam).

6.  The will of God can be superimposed on the medium also and thus, you can say that God is both material and designer. If you isolate the medium separately, the theories of both Ramanuja and Madhva are also co-related.

7.  You say that the human incarnation is just the cosmic will, which is the collection of awareness of all the living beings (samashti chit). If that is so, you should not find any new item in the human incarnation apart from the souls or if you find a new property, it should be present in all the souls. If you unite 10 ml. of milk from each of ten vessels into a single vessel, the 100 ml. milk should be exactly same as the milk in each vessel. If the human incarnation is having special knowledge and miracles, the same should be found in all the souls. At the end of Kaliyuga, all the souls are spoiled and no soul wants punishment. In such case, how the Kalki incarnation comes to punish them, since the incarnation is the collective awareness of the souls?

8.  The Drushti Srushti Vada can apply to God. Drushti is a process of work form of energy of seeing the object. The object is also work form of energy. Thus, seeing (karma) and object (karyam) are the items of the world. However, God sees without eyes (pasyatyachakshuh- Veda). This means that God is unimaginable and cannot be any soul. As per the Veda, God created the world for entertainment. Since the action and object are homogenous energy and since the Veda says that God generated energy, the world exists based on the requirement of the God. The soul cannot see the same external world without eyes. When the object is same and if God and soul are not different, then why this difference exists? In the case of the soul, the Srushti Drushti Vada is true. The soul sees the external world, which is created by God. Even if the soul does not see, the external world exists. When a person is sleeping, the other person is seeing the external world. According to your Eka Jiiva Vada, both the souls are one and the same and both are Brahman. In such case, how this (the same soul not seeing the world and seeing the world simultaneously) is possible? In a city, all are sleeping. The people of another city cannot see this city. According to your theory, the city should disappear there. When you speak about the soul in the world, you should follow the scientific logic. Of course, in the case of unimaginable God, due to His omnipotency, there is no objection to Drushti Srushti Vada. If you apply the same to the human beings, even children will laugh at such poetical statements.

9.  Realization is the stage of determination in the knowledge. The liberation is its practical consequence. The realization should be based on the right knowledge so that the liberation is really attained as the immediate consequence of the right knowledge. Suppose you are bound by a rope. Suppose you find a knife very near to you, which can be taken by your mouth and the rope can be cut. Such right knowledge gives you the liberation. The determination to use the knife leads to implementation and the fruit is liberation. Suppose the knife has no sharpness. In such case the determination, implementation cannot give the result. Suppose the knife is just made of a piece of pad, then also no liberation is possible. Thus, if the right knowledge is not intensive or if the knowledge is twisted and wrong no liberation is possible. Therefore, the most important thing for liberation is not the realization only but it should be the right intensive knowledge given by the Sadguru.

To be continued...

★ ★ ★ ★ ★