tat tvam asi

Tat tvam asi, is more a revelation of the ever evident 'self' to be brahman, rather than a 'self', 'knowing' a brahman other than oneself.

Since oneself is always self evident, the knowledge is only removing the false notions about the self, and communicating that self is satyam-jnanam-anantam. Here self is not known, but the false notions are removed thats all.

By removal of false notions, ones own experience can be resolved in knowledge.

Ones present experience of ones psychological state, and ones present lot is validated, as ishvaras order, one stands validated, both in terms of what one experiences and who oneself is.

Stages of bhakti

The glory of ishvara is such that without his blessings no work or desire will meet a positive end. Every positive end to a good work only happens with the blessings of ishvara. This ishvara is the overlord, the infinite wisdom.
When we say the gayatri mantra, we ask this lord ishvara, as matha savitri , to bless us , by guiding our actions and thoughts, with her infinite wisdom, we say light our minds with your presence, which is of the nature of infinite wisdom.

This bhakti we can develop, by inviting the presence of the lord , of ishvari in ourself.

Here the ourself, and the lord is separately looked at from the standpoint of ahamkara, which is a idenitification with body mind, and the totality, which is looking at ishvara as the totality. Here there can be a relationship, from the standpoint of the body mind, I can have a relationship with the total, with bhagavan.

However when one comes to the vedic knowledge given by bhagavan, bhagavan brings us closer to herself, via knowledge, and makes us non separate from herself, by means of this knowledge.

She gives brahmajnanam, wherein brahman is the all pervading, non dual reality, that pervades the body mind, and pervades the totality, and is in fact the truth of the totality.

So from the absolute standpoint, in absolute truth, ishvara and jiva are both non dual, one reality, and this reality is atma.

It is only in the mithya standpoint, we can talk about ego, identification with body mind, a totality of infinite wisdom, of manifest and unmanifest ishvara and so on, is from the mithya standpoint.

So in and through vyavahara, we need not lose sight of the one all pervading reality, which is the truth of vyavahara. So any actions performed, we see that it is only performed when we look at it form the mithya standpoint.

Even pooja, and so on.. and relationships, all are from the mithya standpoint.

Satyam is the viewer, the very truth of the one who views, and is not something that subjects itself to any analysis at all. Simply pervades every point of view.
Without which no point of view 'is' , it itself is free from all points of view. The very beginning, end and middle of all is brahman, brahman is not a separate subject matter for discussion.

There is a good reason we say that, brahman is knowing that, knowing which, everything is known. Because there isnt anything else left to be known, it is the very reality of knower, known and knowledge. It is the very initiating point of knowledge, the very culmination of knowing, the process of knowledge itself, that being the case how is it possible to miss brahman, but for a peculiar kind of ignorance, that can as though cover it.

The only way to know brahman , is 'I am' brahman.

So why I bring this up, is initially when we start off worshipping the lord with name and form, with a particular form, then as the very totality, then we graduate to worshipping the lord as the very brahman the non dual reality, the atma itself.

Laukika sukham is apUrnam anityam

The lot of the jivas , is to seek laukika sukham, as the 'state of oneself' being 'sukham' is what is desired.

This desire takes various forms, covered under artha, kAma and also under dharma.

Artha is the desire for security, security of the body, and security to conduct ones life with adequate health, financial security to maintain oneself.

Under kama comes what we call as luxuries, and something greater than the necessities. While food, clothing, shelter , come under artha, or necessities, anything more than that comes under kAma or luxuries.

In modern times we are seeing the trend, wherein more and more luxuries are getting converted to necessities, hence life is becoming more and more complex.

The next means to happiness is dharma, a human being is generally not satisfied, especially after a certain degree of maturity, a person wants more than just luxuries and security. We want punya, to do good for others, to contribute to the society, to be a righteous person. These are also desires that bring sukham or happiness, both from the satisfaction of performing these actions, and also from the punya gained as a result of these 'reaching out' activities.

There is also, for the believers in the vedas, various yajnas, karmas are available, that can gaurantee, sukham in other lokas, after passing away of this body, one can desire for svarga and so on, that is another form of desire , for sukham by earning punya.

The common denominator in all these kinds of sukham, is that all these are not nitya sukham, rather they are anitya sukham. Anitya means they are necessarily time bound.

Even for a person who has acquired a great deal of punya, he can go up to svargaloka, and in svarga it is mere spending of punya, until the punya is exhausted, the person again has to be born as a human being , wherein there is the possibility of performing further karmas.

What one seeks all through , in all ones activities and en-devours is a permanent sukham, which appears is not available in the activities and the material gained from the lokas ( be it this , or a higehr loka) , referred to as laukika sukham.

The vedas which initially in the karma kanda, give the means to achieve sukham ends that are anitya, such as svarga and so on, in the later part, known as jnana kanda, give the means to achieve the nitya sukham or permanent sukham.

The means to permanent sukham is presented not as a material, to be gained. This is indeed logical, since no material by itself is something that can contain happiness as its nature.

If one observes in ones own life, the very same acquisition can be both a source of happiness as well as sorrow for different people, and even for the very same person, what is a source of happiness today, the same thing may become a cause for sorrow tomorrow. Whatever is in this world is impermanent, and even its capability to bring happiness is impermanent.

Therefore the happiness that the acquisition brings cannot be construed as a 'property' or 'attribute' that belongs to the material or acquisition, rather the happiness is experienced within oneself.
It is oneself that one finds to be 'happy' , when temporarily the 'wanting person' subsides, a desire is fulfilled, I see 'myself as fulfilled'.

It is this 'seeing myself as fulfilled', 'seeing myself as whole', ' seeing myself as devoid of limitations', this is what we call as 'happiness' or sukham.

This being the case, the shAstra presents the means to permanent sukham, nitya sukham, not as another acquisition, which as we saw , no acquisition can be permanent, neither reliable, neither a source of happiness by itself.

Rather shAstra present nitya sukham, as the reality of oneself, as the very truth about oneself.

Shastra or the vedas, proclaim the cause of sorrow to be very different, and unlike from what we might imagine. This condition of repeated travails and the roller coaster experience of cyclical waves of sorrow and happiness, the shAstra calls as 'samsara', and this condition is purely said to be a product of ignorance.

In truth, says the shAstra, in reality, the atma or the self, is whole, pristine, pure, not subject to birth or death or change, of the very nature of limitlessness or fullness, which is what one experiences as 'the happy self' even in instances when the wanting person subsides for the time being.

ShAstra goes into the very cause of 'why the person finds himself to be wanting'. To answer this question the shAstra points out a beginingless ignorance, due to which the person, the being , atma who is by very nature itself, of the nature of fullness and completeness, identifies with a 'projected' limitation of the body mind. We clearly see that the body mind is full of limitations, and hence are unable to accept ourself, as one subject to limitations.

This refusal to accept oneself as subject to limitations, as well as the fact that we do see ourself as 'whole' and 'not wanting' often, on even hearing something as simple as a joke, does prove that, the contention made by the shAstra, about ourselves being 'of the nature of fullness' and the possibility of their being an ignorance, and the possibility of commiting a mistake in terms of ones own understanding of oneself, as a something that we cannot completely dismiss.

Since the shAstra offers a solution, and we are indeed wanting what the shAstra offers via a solution to ignorance i.e the fulfilled self, a permanently fulfilled self, we have no choice but to consider this solution, and give it a hearing, a chance.

Giving it a chance, means we need to have trust, a trust pending understanding, this is called an attitude of trust. So we buy the possibility of us being ignorant about our true self, and look for knowledge as a solution, as any ignorance is obviously countered by knowledge alone.

ShAstra hence offers the means to nitya sukham, via atma jnanam or self knowledge.
We need not only the shAstra, but also a guide, who knows how to decipher and communicate the teaching of the shAstra. There also happens to be a methodology of teaching the shAstra and giving the knowledge that removes this ignorance. Hence the shAstra comes not alone, but comes along with a guru, from a valid parampara, a teaching parampara or lineage.

We say that the vedas are beginingless , as beginingless as the universe, and so is the guru. We consider ishvara, himself, who manifested as the vedas alongside the universe, as also the very first guru, and this guru parampara, we say is still alive today, as shankaracharya, adi shankaracharya is available to us as the in between link, to this teaching tradition.

Thereby in order to gain this 'nitya sukham' that we all seek, we have an attitude of trust pending understanding, in the shAstra, the guru and the guru parampara, and ishvara who is guiding us all through this means to remove ignorance, and reveal oneself as wholeness.

This 'trust pending understanding' means that we make the guru-shastra as the principal center of our lives, and we tweak our lifestyle, or goals and attitudes to make it conducive towards gaining this knowledge.

The bhagavad gita says that this knowledge is not just available to renunciates or sanyasins, but it is equally available to grhstAs or householders as well. In the bhagavad gita itself, which itself is a means to this self knowledge, both the teacher lord krsna and the student arjuna, are householders and in fact kshatriyas who are always in the very thick of action.

If it is available even in the midst of such happening battlescene of the mahabharatha, it can certainly be available to us in our daily lives , where all we do is go to office, and build some software or do some accounts.

It is upto our own free will, and the intelligent use of our free will, to first identify the problem, see the shAstra and guru as a possible in fact a probable means to solve this problem, and finally gain the complete confidence trust, and of course the very knowledge that validates the trust and makes it more real than anything else.

This is what we are all born, as humans for. 

sakshi chaitanyam is not in space behind the mind

sakshi chaitanyam is not inside space and behind ones mind.


Sakshi chaitanyam is the very self , the awareness that is unchanging in all 3 states of waking dreaming and sleeping.

The states come and go, but awareness undergoes no change.

Awareness is witness to time, to the changing states, to the body mind, undergoing changes but it itelf remains changeless.

Awareness is an independent, self existent , and awareness is self evident, I need not be aware myself, myself being awareness itself.

Now space, time, mind and so on, are upAdhis , or superimpositions on awareness, I am aware of these superimpositions. I become as though the knower in the presence of the mind and objects during the waking state, and as the dream knower in the dream state, am aware of the dream objects.

These objects do not have a being of there own, and I am indeed the reality of the names and forms.

I am pure non dual consciousness

I am , is brahman, brahman is the cause of all that is here.

Brahman does not become the cause, by undergoing change, or on account of its will.

Whereas the state of having a desire, having a will, and undergoing change and so on, are mithya in terms of reality.

When the word mithya is used, we cannot say "untrue" altogether, since we are talking about something that is, jagad is , manifestation is.

However, we can say that brahman hasnt undergone any change, and for that matter, there is neither the unmanifest, nor the manifest, and there is no jagad in the case of brahman, from the standpoint of absolute truth or satyam.

However from the mithya standpoint, there is very much a manifestation, and this same brahman is seen as the cause of the manifestation. Since the manifestation is mithya, the causal brahman is also mithya, satyam being brahman devoid of any status whatsoever , such as the status of being a cause or effect.


This brahman that is seen as the cause, has to be understood as the self oneself, I.

It is only due to ignorance that I take myself to be a jiva. As a "I have a body" person.

Rather I am the absolute being , formless, happen to be the knower, rather am the truth of the knower, hence of the nature of consciousness, in fact I am consciousness or awareness itself.

When I say I am aware of the flower, I am the awareness, that is self evident, awareness itself, hence I dont need to be aware of myself.

See if I say I am aware of myself, then it is as though there is awareness, and there is a myself that I am aware of.

In reality I am awareness itself, hence where is the need to be aware of awareness, awareness is the very being or reality of every perception.

This awareness happens to be the knower, w.r.t. thoughts and the mind and so on.

This awareness happens to be the nimitta kArana with maya upAdhi,

This awareness is the material cause , when we say any object "is" the "is" refers to awareness.

Awareness is self existent.

What really is consciousness

Consciousness, is a word, that indicates the reality of the self.

The self is mistaken for the body and mind, and various levels of body and mind.

These are the self mistaken to have attributes of the body and mind.

Whereas in truth, self is said to be consciousness free from body mind attributes.

Consciousness means what, it means that which is the reality of the seer.

The reality of the knower.

See, upanisad says 'shrotrasya shrotram,  manaso manaH', the ear of the ear, and the mind of the mind. The knower via which mind and ear, mind and nose, mind and eye, mind and togue, mind and skin become "perceivers".

This knower is not a physical entity that is at any point "known" , knower is the not the known, is very clear.

Hence the knower is that being which is the self evident reality in whose proximity, the ear and mind can hear, the eye and the mind can see and so on.

This consciousness is called as the knower only with respect to the mind and the sense organs , and the presence of objects, in reality it is an independent self evident being of the nature of existence.

ShAstra says in fact this chit, or consciousness is in fact non dual, since it is satyam, the very cause.

This universe of names and forms, that are also manifest as the mind and the sense organs too, this universe is projected out of the very consciousness as the substratum or the reality.

The projection is due to beginingless ignorance , avidya or maya, which has it basis or existence or being in brahman which is consciousness. Consciousness is brahman.

The names , forms, functions are superimposed on this brahman by maya shakti.

Duality is a result error out of ignorance

There is ignorance, and naturally ignorance leads to error.

Ignorance of rope, is what leads to error of seeing the snake where there is only the rope.

Where there is only brahman, the jagad, and its evolution and devolution is seen, the cause here is error due to ignorance or avidya.

Avidya operates at the universal level as that which projects infinite names and forms, and brahman the consciousness serves as the adhistAnam or the substratum or truth, the basis for the error, as rope is the basis for the snake.


Avidya has no being of its own, hence brahman itself  lends being or existence to avidya, here in this case avidya is nothing but mAya, the all knowing, all powerful, being, that manifests various names and forms.

Brahman with the upAdhi of mAya is hence both the nimitta kArana as well as upAdana kArana.

upAdana kArana means the material cause. For the jagad, jagad being a product of avidya, the reality of material of the jagad is certainly going to have the adhistAanam or basis which is brahman, that alone as the material cause.

However point to note here is that brahman is the vivarta upAdana kAranam, which means its cause that undergoes no change at all.

Whereas, from the unmanifest to the manifest, it is avidya, which undergoes change, from being the pure ignorance unmanifest, to projecting a plethora of names and forms.

In the case of jiva, the jiva on account of ignorance, sees that which is "not", and hence is 'subject to ignorance'. Whereas in the case of isvara, isvara is using ignorance or avidya as a power, to project the various names and forms, thereby manifesting himself in various forms as AkAsha, vAyu, Agni, Apah, Prtvi and all their modifications.

The 5 koshas of the body of the jiva, namely, annamaya, prAanamaya, manomaya, vijnAnamaya and anandamaya are combinations of the five elements alone. Thereby brahman which manifests as the universe, is the same brahman which manifests as the individual body as well.

The same brahman is also present as the witness consciousness, or sakshi chaitanyam within ones mind, as "I am".

If that is the case, it is purely ignorance which covers this already manifest brahman 'I', and avidya alone becomes the cause for the dehAtama buddhi, which alone leads to first deha abhimAna, then kartrtva bhava, once there is karma, there is the cycle of birth and rebirth.

Hence the jiva is as beginingless as avidya itself.

Only by removal of avidya, the jiva is not born anymore, since there is no jiva, rather only the already manifest brahman shines as it were.

Al the way it is mithya, and satyam is all the way

All the way from being the very cause of srshti or manifestation, from having names, forms and function, from being the doer, to the very maintainer of this manifestation, all the roles, names and forms of brahman, namely saguna brahman , is mithya.

Mithya means that whose existence is purely name and form, whose existence is purely namesake, exists only in the manner of speaking about it, but the actual vastu is something else.

When we say anything IS, that IS , is not that vastu with a name or form, but that IS is something "else".

When we say "pot IS" , the pot is only a name and a form and function of being a pot, but for all practical reality, reality of pot is clay, and clay is NOT pot. Clay has nothing to do with pot.

Here we say clay is satyam, and pot is mithya.

Same way we say chaitanyam atma is satyam, and this around atma having a maya shakti, and with this shakti, manifesting as various names and forms, then entering the very creation, this is all at the level of mithya, or vyavaharika.

Vyavaharika in the sense as not being the innate nature of chaitanyam, rather being a superimposition on chaitanyam.

Chaitanyam has no attributes, is changeless.

So for it to be the cause, it must be something extra, which we call as maya shakti, which is addition without real addition. Nothing can be added to the whole, as the whole is all infinite. So addition of maya shakti is not a real addition, it is an addition without the substance undergoing any change at all.

It is a point of view,

It is a drshti, a way of being,  which has nothing to do with the being itself.

What is mithya need not be contended with, as atma is satyam, unrelated to mithya.

Whereas mithya has no being other than satyam.

Chaitanyam and Jadam

Atma is chaitanya svarupa.

Atma is also nirguna. This much can be understood, since atma is the knower of jadam, and jadam is saguna.

For eg: the body, is saguna. As I know the table, so I know the body as well.
I know the sky, I know space, I know tree.

All these objects of knowledge are jadam, and chaitanyam is the knower of these.

In case of sense organs, and mind, they are also jadam, and it is the presence of atma, which makes them the seer , hearer, knower etc.


The question is around the relationship of atma chaitanya svarupa atma, and jada rupa jagad.

The jada rupa jagad is not existing as a parallel entity with its own existence per shruti.

This is also backed by yukti, since when we say "is" the chaitanyam "is".

However we cannot place chaitanyam as an object within jagad, since in that case it wont be chaitanyam the svarupa of the knower, it would be the inert or jadam.

Hence we cannot place in space or time.

We cannot think of anything outside time either, outside inside itself is a concept in space, its a space concept.

So we do not have any of those understandings explaning the relationship.

The shruti is the pramana here, and shruti reveals through its own words, that chaitanyam is kAranam and jadam is kAryam.

Chaitanyam is satyam, and jadam is mithya.

Chaitanyam as the kAranam has a shakti known as maya, and with this maya shakti, chaitanyam manifests with names and forms and is called as jadam. This same chaitanyam enters its own manifestation as the knower behind the buddhi and as the srshti kartha, as the nimitta kArana as well.
Its not a physical entry but a functional presence. It alone manifests, maintains is own manifestation as well.

This maya shakti we say is mithya. It is chaitanyam but chaitanyam by itelf is free from maya, unconnected to maya shakti. Just like a pot is simply a name and form, and has no reality of its own, maya is also just a name , a function, a power , and has its reality in chaitanyam that is akarta.

So all that is here we see as maya kAryam, maya being the kAranam, so it is not real.

Once we say the kAranam is maya shakti for the jagad, and this maya shakti is not real, then the whole jagad loses its reality, jagad also being mithya, since the cause itself is mithya. Brahman never became jagad, neither can it become, neither it need become, neither is their any real becoming.

The as though becoming, we dismiss as "as though".

Chaitanyam remains as satyam ,atma as satyam and atma kArana, kArya sambandha is mithya.

Dharma Devata - Hindi

सृष्टि की संरचना में देवी देवताओं का वास है|

कर्म एवं कर्म फल इनके बीच कारण कार्य संभंध है जिसे हम धर्म देवता के रूप में पहचानते हैं |

धर्म देवता जो है, वह हर एक मानव के जीवन में, अत्यंत महत्वपूर्ण है| यह इसलिए, के मानव को पुरुषार्थ का प्रयोग करने की क्षमता प्रधान की गई है|

इसका मतलब यह है की मानव हर कर्म में बुद्धि का सही प्रयोग कर, अपने कर्मों को संतुलित कर सकता है, तथा अंपने जीवन मार्ग का स्‍वयं नियंत्रण कर सकता है| यह स्वतंत्रता पशु पक्षी में बहुत ही कम है, और मानव में काफ़ी अधिक मात्रा में है|

परंतु यह ब|त आवश्य है, की मानव विमूढ़ता से इस बुद्धि को सही तरह प्रयोग नही कर पाता, और अनेक बार सही मार्ग को चुन नही पाता | यही मानव जाती का दुर्भाग्य है|

अगर मानव धर्म देवता को सही प्रकार से पाचनने से इनकार कर देता है, तो वह आशा एवं निराशा के द्वन्द्व में फस जाता है|

धर्म देवता को सही प्रकार समझना इसलिए मानव के लिए अत्यंत आवश्यक हो जाता है|

कर्म दो प्रकार के होते हैं| धर्ंानुसार एवं धर्म के वीरुध | सुकर्म और दुष्कर्म |

क्या सुकर्म है, एवं क्या दुष्कर्म है, इसका ज्ञान, हर मनुष्य की बुद्धी में स्थित है|

Benefits of self knowledge

What is the benefit of knowing that I am the all pervading limitless reality of all that is, I am consciousness the atma that is all pevading, what is the benefit of this knowledge?

The answer is that the benefit of this knowledge is the reality itself.

The reality itself, which I am is the benefit, since I am limitless, and I am birthless, and I am endless, and I am fulfilled and whole, which is what I want to be in the first place.

So the truth is that I am what I want to be, and with that being the case, what I want to become I become, this obviously is the only means and ends that is beneficial.

Therefore moksa is the only real pursuit.

An all pervading self evident reality revealed via words

Brahman is an all pervading and self evident reality i.e. atma, and is covered due to ignorance.

The words of the upanisad are a pramana or means of knowledge to remove this brahman ignorance, atma ignorance.

One known that atma I am, so atma is self evident.

However we superimpose the qualities of the body, such as remoteness in terms of time and space the presence of attributes such as being born, subject to aging, and death, unto this brahman or atma, which is as a matter of fact, the reality of all that is here.

There is a knower, known, knowledge triad that one is experiencing as a waker , dreamer, and even deep sleep I know I slept well.

This triad is taken to be the "atma" limiting, the atma to the knower alone, and superimposing the attributes of the body unto atma.

However in reality, atma is an attributeless all pervading reality, that pervades, the knower, known, and knowledge all three.

This atma is of the nature of consciousness, and reflects or is seen as "isness" w.r.t the known objects and w.r.t knowledge thought forms, and even with respect to the knower, wherein the knower says I am, and this knower is of the nature of consciousness.

This consciousness , the reality of the knower, is the non dual reality, that is not limited to the knower, whereas is the attributeless reality that pervades and lends existence to both the known and the knowledge.

Therefore , the knower, the known as well as knowledge, all the three are on non dual reality called atma, which is the satyam, and the status of being knower, known and knowledge with names and forms, are mithya, or a transactional lower order of reality that is not absolute truth.

Thus shastra serves as means of knowledge that the self evident atma is an all pervading attributeless non dual, cosnciousness, that lends existence to all that we say "is" or "am", and the world or jagad is mithya.

Brahman is satyam, jagad is mithya, the jiva or self is brahman.

Being witness vs participant

The self is the witness of desires, as well as actions and prayers made to fulfil those desires.

The basic svarupa of consciousness is non separate from the atma, whereas the role of being a participating doer, or person who is praying while being non separate from the atma, they are incidental to atma, and not intrinsic.

So while I can be an actor and a doer, and a person who prays, the one to whom I pray, the reality of that being is myself. The one to whom I pray, and the one for whom and unto whom I dedicate my actions, that being , the reality of that being is atma.

Thus knowing the fact that ishvara, IS, with the same certainty that I am, ones desires are fulfilled then and there.

Fear of desires being not fulfilled due to ommissions and commissions

Sometimes what one desires may or may not be fulfilled or happen.
Things may happen more , less or neutral to how much one desires.

If it is more than what one desires, the state of mind is happy mind, and neutral plus sad mind thereon.

These states of the mind, are driven by the psychological order, where ones wanting state is fuelled by desires, and their need to get fulfilled.

This wanting person, is actually a basic person, who says I am incomplete, wanting to be whole is the base desire in every desire.

In case of a jnani, the jnani is aware that the self is whole.

In such a scenario the base desire is no more present, as one is already whole and complete.

The other transactional desires can be there, again these transactional desires may or may not be fulfilled, based on the law of karma, the prayers and so on. Jnani is free to desire and pray also.
In this case the prayer is to nullify his own past omissions and commissions , hence pray for the well being of all, and of oneself and ones own duties.

When such a prayer is made, it is made with a desire , and the desire will be fulfilled as per the laws of karma, as per the laws which are isvara. This paradigm has no impact on the fulfilled wholeness of the being who is the jnani, and does not have any impact on brahmatvam or brahman, in its svarupa.

The fulfilling of desires is also brahman, with maya sakti acting as the karma phala dAta, and the self acting as the "doer" agent of action, either to achieve the desire, or the act of prayer to turn the tide where there are hidden obstacles, which is ones own punyAs and pApas from the past, ones own prarabdha karma.

This prarabdha I have full freedom to pray to nullify the pApas, while fully aware that in reality the atma was neither a doer, nor a receiver of actions and their fruits thereon.

In that case what is the prayer for, the prayer is as though, for as though desires, and the results also have to follow an as though order, so there is some order in the giving of results.

This is the paradigm in which the jnani finds oneself.

Gnanam is atma svarupa, what does that mean?

What is it meant when it is said that jnanam is the svarupa of atma.

Now there are certain things I try to be, I try to do, and certain things I am without doing anything, which is my nature, in the sense I am that.

For eg: if you take gold, gold can be a ring, a necklace or a simple lump of gold, however the essential goldness, the shine of gold is what makes gold as "gold". Hence that shineness is not an attribute of gold, it is the svarupa or essential nature of gold, without which you cannot call gold as gold. Gold need not undergo change, or become shining, gold shines off itself.

Same way atma is chit, or consciousness. So when we say atma is a knower of thoughts, the knowerness is not something atma becomes, atma happens to be the knower w.r.t to thought, but this awareness is atmas very svarupa, its nature.

Awareness or jnanam we need not define it as a "understood" thing, it is self evident.
Why is that? When I say I "know" an apple, I am the knower. However with regards to myself, I do not need to know myself at all. The reason is that knowledge is my very svarupa, the awareness is my very svarupa. I need not become aware, I am awareness itself. The pure awareness.

In apple awareness, there is an apple form, and I happen to be the truth of that form, wherein they say I am a knower of apple. But in reality I am pure awareness that is formless awareness, which need not know itself, as there isnt a second thing to know.

Since I am awareness itself, Any awareness there is, I am the truth of that awareness. I am the truth of apple awareness, I am the truth of space awareness, I am the truth of time awareness, space , time , apple etc. being names and forms.

This is at the level of thought.

How about reality itself, the creation itself.

With regard to the jagad, I am the awareness with maya shakti, which means I am awareness with all knowledge. Just like in the dream state, awareness is the very mountain, the streams and the people in the dream, with maya upadhi, awareness alone manifests as this universe. So the difference is in the roles, and not in the essential nature of I being awareness that is non dual.

Awareness is also limitless and infinite, here there is no space or time or any creation. Neigh awareness the I am is not even a cause of creation or anything, there is no name or form here, whereas at the level of names and forms I am the truth of the unmanifest and the manifest both. I am brahman.

Place and nature of recognition

For the recognition of Brahman there are two main aspects
A. Place where Brahman is recognized
B. Nature of the recognition

The place where Brahman is known or recognized is the same as is for other objects such as cloud, sky, tree , apple and so on. It is in the mind.
Just like there is a vrtti or thought form that reveals an apple, there is such a vrtti known as brahmAkara vrtti , which is what makes one recognize Brahman.

The nature of recognition is however not the same as recognising an apple. An apple is a limited object , whereas Brahman is limitless and also has to include the knower to be limitless .

If a vastu has to include the knower and also be revealed to the knower by a vrtti the operation of means of knowledge has to be different .

The advantage shAstra has is that Brahman for starters happens to be self evident vastu , as it is the reality of the knower . The knower is a status given to the reality of the self or atma , and this atma is Brahman is the message of the shAstra .

What is meant by self evident?
See any knowledge involves a knower a known and a thought . In case of apple , apple is seen by apple thought using the eyes and the knower knows the apple.
Whereas in the case of the knower , the knower does not need to be known like an apple. The knower is a pre requisite to the operation of knowing itself and the knower alone determines a thing as existent. This knower I is hence self evident doesn't need to become known by an act of knowing , in deep sleep also , while one doesn't talk in deep sleep , there is rememberance that I slept well , and this I is awareness that need not be known , is self evident in the sense doesn't need to be known, being the very knower. So all shAstra does is turn ones attention to the knower and does not suddenly makes an unknown knower known, that's absurd as the knower was always present but not noticed or talked about .
shAstra talks about the knower. It talks about the knower as a self evident and self existent vastu. Self evident as it need not be known and self existent as it does not have ones existence depending on something other than oneself.

Now when shAstra says this atma is Brahman it has to define what is Brahman. So the nature of knowledge here is by removing confusion around the nature of atma.
When shAstra says atma is Brahman , it cannot be qualifying atma since Brahman is attributeless there are no qualifications.
So a self evident vastu , if nothing  is or can be qualified about by shAstra , then nature of knowledge can only be about removing a pre existing ignorance which leads to misconceptions .

The nature of the preexisting ignorance is peculiar. It cannot be an ignorance of a specific attribute or aspect as Brahman neither has attributes and is also part less.
So the nature of ignorance is essentially a specific form of ignorance which we can only say is Brahman ignorance . Or self ignorance . Or mula Avidya.

This Avidya is not available for comparison. We cannot compare. Brahman ignorance isnt like any other ignorance ,like ignorance of avocado. Because an avocado is completely unknown till one sees the fruit , while atman is self evident and need not be known at all.

Yet it is not known atman is Brahman , that 'not knowing atman is brahman' exists and is what we call as brahman ignorance or mula Avidya. So the vast need not be known, however the vastu lends itself to a particular ignorance , which can be tackled.

What does brahman mean, brahman means satyam jnanam anantham. What is satyam is jnanam, and this satyam jnanam is anantam, like gold it pervades all ornaments, and is independent, while ornaments depend on gold, gold is independent.

Same way brahman is independent, atman is independent, while anything that IS, gains its existence from brahman, and belongs to a lower order of reality. This is what we say is brahma vidya.

Brahma vidya is a peculiar vidya, since it doesn't reveal a vastu , rather an  pre existing ignorance with regard to the reality of the vastu, is corrected . The pre existing ignorance with regard to reality of atma , leads to a misconception, where atma is mistaken to 'have' and be as good as a lower order of reality. The cause here is a positive state of ignorance wherein one doesn't know that Brahman is satyamjnanam anantam and atman is Brahman. This ignorance is destroyed by shabda pramana.

The ignorance of rope causes snake to be seen. The reality of the snake is itself the reality of the rope.
Here we are talking about realities. Therefore what is eliminated is the confusion over the reality of the self, the order of reality to which it belongs, and not truly an complete ignorance of brahman. Or atman which is self evident. Vastu is self evident covered by ignorance.

There is no ignorance that atman exists, but ignorance is with the fact that atman belongs to a higher order of reality, which makes it independent and non dual., Namely satyamjnanam anantam anantam.

This ignorance is removed. By means of a prakriya.

A prakriya that first posits atman as a cause, and the jagad as an effect.
Next sublates the cause effect paradigm to a lower order of reality, and attributeless self evident atman to be the svarupa and belonging to a higher order of reality.

Be careful here, that brahman is recognized in the mind alone, as the 'I am'.
So while we recognize brahman in the mind alone, the mind does belong to a lower order of reality.
What shastra does is with the mind upadhi, the self IS, and this self it carefully spells out the essential unchanging nature of the self, amidst the changing thought forms. Amidst the changing thought forms, of each cognition, the unchanging svarupa of the self is ever shining.
Just like in the changing forms of gold ornaments, the unchanging shine of gold is ever evident, in the case of the self the shining, or self evident nature is ever available and available for knowledge.

Same way the ever existent unchanging nature also entails a certain independence.

Inspite of the fact that brahman is recognized in each cognition with the mind alone as "chit" or consciousness that is self evident , self existent and unchanging, the self is also equated to brahman, by "shabda pramana" , when it says anantham brahman, and atma is brahman.

The word anantam implies atman/brahman is not space ,time or attribute wise limited in terms of its "svarupa", hence the "time space" and "attributes" of each thought wherein brahman shines, and even in between two thoughts , where there is "no particular thought" , "thought absence" is also where brahman shines as the reality of the "thought absence", between two thoughts, so the essential nature of brahman is not limited to any particular thought, and nor limited by any particular thought. A thought by design happens in a specific mind, in time and space, whereas, brahman is not shining "dependent" on time and space,rather brahman "lights up" or makes time and space "evident' and hence is in reality independent of time and space.

Further when shAstra goes on to say brahman with maya shakti is the cause of time and space, then time and space themselves become mithya realities which gain "existence" from atman or brahman.

So here shAstra promotes brahman 'as though' to the status of being a cause, and "sublates" the entire jagad and cause of the jagad unto brahman as the unchanging material cause.

This mahavakya, leaves the independence, limitlessness, non duality, consciousness of brahman unchallenged as there isnt a second.

Brahman is able to accomodate anything, being a cause, being an effect, undergoing changes, anything can be accomodated as a lower order of reality.

So with the mind upadhi , Brahman is, that much is seen. In every cognition Brahman is.
Also in every thought Brahman is reality of the thought .
In every object Brahman is truth if the object.
This Brahman alone is atman.

The recognition of body consciousness

We recognise that I am conscious.
The body and mind is conscious that much we can recognise or aware off .
This awareness of the conscious nature of body mind , is what we call as chidabhasa.
The consciousness reflecting or available or recognised in ones body mind.
I myself am available for recognition in mind and myself enliven this body as pranamaya, and present as annamaya, the gross body.
So annamaya, pranamaya, manomaya, vijnanamaya, Amandamaya , is my own vibhootis ,different ways of looking at atma which is the truth of all of these bodies that I am.
Many avatars of the same  vastu namely atman is these koshas such as annamaya and so on.... 

You are never going to have a vrtti or a thought form for atma

You are never going to get a specific thought form , wherein you will get brahman knowledge.

Brahman knowledge only happens through shAstras methodology or prakriyas delivering a mahavakya which creates the brahmAkara vrtti.

So this brahmAkAra vrtti can in fact be created by taking up any specific daily experience set of thoughts that one gets, which is what is pointed out in kenopanisad when it is said "pratibodha viditam matam". So one doesnt have to wait for a specific vrtti for atma gnana, whereas one has to recognise here and now as one understand these words, that atma is the reality of every vrtti, the knower as well as the known object.

Now how to recognise is again, purely by using the upanisad as a pramana, and not via any specific experience, so one has to recall and bring back the words of the upanisad, and what it says about brahman, atman and the oneness of atman and brahman.

When you take any vrtti, atman is first of all understood to be A. the knower of the vrtti.
The second step is to see that this knower of the vrtti, who is chaitanya svarupa, is a limitless entity that is not space wise separate from any vrtti.
Suppose I say "space IS", and I am the knower of space. When I say space "is" and I am the knower of space, the knower of space and the space "thought" cannot be separate from each other in terms of space. Simply because knower, atman is not an object in space. Only an object in space is separate from other objects in space. This shakes up our false notions about the self.
And when shAstra says atman is satyam gnanam anantham, the word anantham makes it clear that atman is the reality of all the three "knower, known and knowledge".
Hence w.r.t any thought using the shastra pramana, one can recognize the atman as the adhistAnam, the bedrock, in this case a changless conscious bedrock upon which the thought form bases its existence.
This very same atman, the conscious bedrock serves as the knower of the thought form, and at the same time serves as the reality of the object of thought as well.

So the knower, known and knowledge all 3 base their existence upon the self which is otherwise known as brahman.

In any thought form, I do not change,The reality of the thought I am, the thought being a name and form alone. A subtle matter form.
The object being a gross matter form.
The knower being a status w,r,t the mind.

You reconize the triad of knower, known and knowledge as purely name, form or function and role having no existence of their own, no existence other than atma. Atma is like gold and various ornaments are the form,

Vastu gnanam

Any object has limitations in terms of its attributes . Such as a bird has a body, an ability to fly and lives in a time and place.

Space itself is that which accommodated and is limited to such a function alone, to accommodate is its function.

So the object has a limitation in terms of its attributes . But is their any limitation in terms of its reality?

Same way the knower within a body is a knower and not the known , its a functional limitation .
He is limited by the mind as to know only one thing at a time, based on a vrtti or thought form.

When we say limitless vastu is the reality there really isn't a limitless vastu that can either be only a known object, or a knower with a mind or a knowledg/ thought form alone.
All these entail attributes and hence limitations , so cannot be the reality which is an all pervading limitless vastu.

So how is it that Shastra can say there is such a thing as Brahman,and that Brahman is Anantha or limitless, And is self existent vastu.

The vastu has to be in that case all pervasive satyam, like gold is all pervasive for all gold ornaments. Such an all pervasive Brahman cannot be simply am object of knowledge neither can be an knower alone limited by known, neither can be a mere thought .

If it is the reality of all 3, then such a reality is already evident, as the knower known knowledge alone,but the reality of these is one , that much isn't known by the knower with a body mind.

This however, shastra says, can be known , and available as a possibility for such a knowledge presents itself with the human potential to recognize that "I am". This 'I am' awareness creates a possiblity of knowing the ultimate reality.

The proposition of an all pervasive one reality , as the truth of knower known and knowledge , implies the knower commonly referred to with the statement I am , can indeed me recognized himself as that one all pervasive reality . And such a recognition is made possible with fact being that the self is self evident , not requiring to be known, no need to apply or operate a means of knowledge in order to know "I am".

The very fact that I am, enables experience to happen , enables the operation of any means of knowledge. I am is ever present as experiencer in every experience and even in deep sleep as one says I slept well.

I can find with enquiry that I am the experiencer and there isn't a possibility to know anything specific 'about' the experiencer as such,reason being that the knower isn't going to have any attributes like a known object , but is simply going to be a 'knower status performer'.

Now one thing the knower status performer tells about atma is that atma the changless satyam is also consciousness. It has chit ad its svarupa, in all 3 states of waking dreaming and sleeping , the known or self evident nature, the knowingness doesn't leave it , hence confirming that chit to be svarupa of the reality 'I'.

This reality alone then is said to be the truth of the known and knowledge , when presenting itself as having attributes , the shastra says so, that this indeed , self indeed is the all pervasive reality.

This is where we give role of Maya to this atma , the fact that atma is having non separate from itself the power to manifest in various forms. Maya is  seen as a relative order of reality, while the nirguna svarupa devoid of any mayatvam is seen to be the absolute reality.

Hence the manifestation of names and forms such as space time, and also the individual body are nothing but the chaitanyam, chit svarupa, consciousness reality manifesting with names and forms.

One such name and form is the individual body, and there happens to be a confusion or ignorance in the individual body mind, with regard to the self, a certain self ignorance, wherein one does not know I am all pervading reality.

This ignorance makes one take the body to be a "second" entity, whereas the body mind is simply a name and form with which the self itself is manifest.

The notion of duality is only due to ignorance.

Even for ishvara there is no duality, there is only a manifestation of various names and forms wherein the reality is only one all pervasive satyam, quashing all notions of duality.

There is however a certain transactional and relative nature which we recognize as the formful state of being, of ishvara, wherein ishvara has a maya sakti non separate from oneself.

This maya sakti, does not mean duality, rather is a different order of reality. Which is not altogether true in the ultimate sense.