"Looking for brahman", confusion

Another habit is to look for brahman. To look for where is brahman.

Sarvam khalvidam brahma, then why look for brahman?

The truth is that, one does not know brahman, so looks for brahman, but one need not look for brahman for two reasons.

1.       All that is here is brahman ( knower, known and knowledge all the three, subject object both)

2.       Brahman vastu is available for knowledge as oneself the atma.

In the example of clay and pot, if we take a few jugs and mugs, the entire world of jugs and mugs can be resolved into one reality clay, it if it pointed out that the pot form is only mithya and clay is the satyam.

In the case of atma gnanam, the brahman is not available as an object, like clay is available. I can show you a pot, then I can ask you to look at clay. You look at clay and then you understand that pot is clay. Hence you are now able to gather the understanding of pot and clay, and understand clay as satyam and pot as mithya, and henceforth resolve all that is made of clay into one clay in your understanding, so you continue to see pots and jugs, but you know there is only clay.

But brahman is not available as an object like clay, so when I show you a tree and say, tree is brahman, sky is brahman , wall is brahman, that it is brahman, is not available for your knowledge. I can only point out that tree is wood, and if you look further, wood is some cellulose, you keep going ad infinitum, any object has its existence in an object which is not that object. Tree, has its existence depending on non-tree. Table, on non-table ( wood). Wood on non-wood ( celloluse).. and so on. That is the nature of jagat. Applies to our own body also.

That search for satyam, is since the means of knowledge is not recognized to be the shabda pramana of the shastra.

The shastra offers this knowledge, says tat tvam asi. You are that brahman. The Drk Chaitanya, the conscious being who is the witness, oneself the atma, the knower of all that is objectified, this person that you are, is that brahman. You need not know yourself like to how you came to know clay. Clay was not already evident, it had to be pointed out that the pot is indeed clay, you had to look,in your mind, you had to understand that all the while, while looking at a pot, you saw clay.

But atma is not an object of sight, but atma is yourself, you who are evident in every sight.

So pratibodha viditam matam. In every sight you are. And in fact who you are, is not limited to the upadhi of being  ,seer consciousness. This again is a pramana vakya, known only through shastra pramana. And it is an assimilable gnanam (knowledge), since this is not contradicted by your own experience.

If you see, you are the waker, dreamer and sleeper, but the ‘I’, has ONLY anvaya ( invariable co-presence), but NO vyatireka (co-variable absence) w.r.t to the waker, dreamer and sleeper.

When waker is, I am, but when I am waker always not IS, since when dreamer is I am, but I am not the waker, rather I am the dreamer.

So while ‘I’ atma has invariable co-presence with ‘waker’, when waker is absent, ‘I’ still IS as dreamer or sleeper. So being a waker, or a seer, is not intrinsic to ‘I’. Just goes a long way in making it clear that ‘I’ is indeed brahman. Helps us assimilate the shastra provided gnanam, by removing any obstructing doubts generated by other means of knowledge. Its not just assimilation, in fact every experience proves that atma is sat , it is satyam. Which means unchanging, as the waker, dreamer, sleeper, undergoes no change. In all thoughts ‘ I’ am. And that I is unchanging. So nature of ‘I’ is anantam, it is satyam and obviously it is ‘chit’ as one Is a conscious being. So our experience not ‘NOT contradicts’ shastra pramana, in fact it validates pramana. And the guru himself/herself uses these prakriyas to help us assimilate the gnanam that is conveyed, the fact that one is purnam brahman. Upanishad itself does that, through statements like pratibodha viditam matam.

Your own body mind, undergoes change, but you are not changing with it, you are aware of the changes to body mind. So it is an assimilable gnanam, that you can indeed be the changeless adhistanam. Adhishtanam does not mean layer underneath as clarified in this post http://vedareflections.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-upadhi-and-adhistana-brahman-is-the.html

, but rather means all pervading brahman.

So, you are that brahman which is all pervading (all pervading is a lakshana, from brahmans standpoint brahman alone is).

This is understanding. You can settle in this understanding, that knower, known , knowledge all the 3 are brahman. By having name and form, brhaman undergoes no change whatsoever, so this problem of pure and impure consciousness is not really there.

Shastra stands vindicated when it says sarvam khalvidam brahma.

Om Namah Shivaya.