Maya

The non object consciousness, self is bhagavan , from the standpoint of the maya shakti which is non separate from this consciousness.

This maya shakti is not subject or object, neither is it cognized as anything separate, it is simply the cause that is given to the visible effect in the form of subject object duality.

So in the non dual consciousness, it is the maya shakti that is said to be a cause, that need not be cognized, but can be simply intellectually understood as the cause, as the effect is indeed cognized.

Its reality is mithya or anirvachaniya, same order of reality as its effect, which is jagat , that is again not ultimately real but has only a dependent reality, depending on consciousness for its existence.

This maya shakti sahita atman is ishvara.

So we do not cognize ishvara, we know ishvara through only shastra, as maya sahita ishvara, and self is this ishvara, with maya shakti.

Maya shakti again need not be cognized, but is taken from the shastra as power of brahman, and its effects are indeed cognized, wherein the cognizer cognized duality by itself is the effect.

So in terms of its effect, the maya shakti is making its presence felt, that is enough to point to its presence as the cause. Its presence need not be cognized as neither object nor subject, as both are effects, it can simply be understood to be non separate causal unmanifest state of brahman. Which is like deep sleep, the causal state.

SO what is pure brahman then, pure brahman is the reality of cognizer, pure consciousness.

So from cognizer, I go to pure consciousness, and I attach attach the maya cause in the unmanifest state to this pure consciousness, and I understand the manifest state of subject object consciousness as its effect, thereby I resolve myself as being brahman. 

Brahman

Brahman appears as jagat , drshta vastus

Brahman is sakshi chaitanyam

Brahman is maya sahita chaitanyam

Brahman is mayin

Brahman is jagat kAranam

Brahman is pratyagatma

Brahman is ahankara upahita chaitanyam

Brahman is shuddha chaitanyam devoid of all above upadhis

List of upadhis is
jagat, sakshitvam, maya, mayin status, karanatvam, ahankara sakshi, antahakarana

Upadhi means mithya existence.

This means it exists with entire existence in satyam

Only shuddha chaitanyam is satyam.

How to become shuddha chaitanyam

Atma is shuddha chaitanyam. Original consciousness is sakshi chaitanyam.
Pure consciousness it is.

It reflects in mind, and makes mind conscious and via mind this world is known through vrittis that are lighted up.

So we can say sakshi chaitanyam is still the knower, but what it knows is based on limitation of the mind as an instrument.

At one time, its not individual things exist.

Sakshi chaitanyam exists, chidabhasa chaitanyam exists, Antahakaranam exists, body and shariras exists, jagat exists, jagat kArana brahman exists, jagat sakshi ishvara exists, srshti sthithi laya karana ishvara chaitanyam exists, maya kAranam exists and mayavi chaitanya svarupa ishvara exists.

All this exists.

Among these we do not see any separate shuddha chaitanyam.

All of these resolve into shuddha chaitanyam.

All of these have to together be resolved into shuddha chaitanayam , in order for shuddha chaitanyam to be understood as anantam chit.

If we resolve only one of these into chit, then the other becomes as though a limiting factor.

Therefore when it is said, I is chit, by knocking off the sakshitvam status, it is not just said I is chit, but also said tat tvam asi, wherein this chit is itself said to be the satyam of tat pada vachyartha also, which includes all that described above.

The chaitanyatvam is considered as satya brahma svarupa. As it is non variable, and presupposes knowledge. Knowledge presupposes consciousness.

In Sakshi chaitanyam, brahman is shuddha chaitanyam , sakshi is a status. This brahman is not limited by this status. The status is given due to jagat, which is a kArayam and the shuddha chaitanyam inheres the effect, pervades the effect, and effect is but the cause appearing as the effect, so with respect to this appearance of jagat, brahman is sakshi, and this being an appearance of brahman or shuddha chaitanyam, cannot be considered as satyam, is in fact mithya, sakshitvam is hence also mithya. same can be said for ishvara who is jagat karanam, srshti sthithi laya karanam, ishvara is chaitanya svarupa, and has not undergone any change but again appears as jagat, as the manifestor of jagat, as the ruler of jagat, as the reality of jagat, who is none other than the shuddha chaitanyam , reality of the sakshi chaitanyam. So I accept all the names and status of being ishvara as an upadhi or appearance which I acknowledge as mithya reality.

I have to acknowledge ishvara, or bhagavan, the reality of this universe, controller, preserver, resolver, from whom we come and go back unto. By whose will all this is sustained, has born and resolves back forth into.

We have to acknowledge this bhagavan, is all pervading order and ruler, and author and controller of all that is here. And who has also given this body mind and intellect to be able to understand for oneself.

This bhagavan is not a remote entity, as the very sakshi chaitanyam atma, this chaitanyam atma with the status of bhagavan (due to maya upadhi), controls the universe.

So the universe is seen as mithya, chaitanyam being present all the way.

In this mithya universe alone we have to see satyam. We cant see a separate satyam. In this mithya alone we have to see satyam.

In sakshi chaitanyam I see myself as pure chaitanyam, sakshi not being an attribute but being a mithya reality. Same goes for all objects all objects have a mithya reality, resolve unto chaitanyam, brahman, I am brahman not just some chaitanyam.

SO all objects resolve into me. Nimitta ishvara resolves into me, maya resolves into me, material resolve into me, shakti and wisdom resolve into me, mind and experiences resolve into me, I alone remain ever shining self existent and evident, and as the source of consciousness and existence for all that is here.

sakshi chaitanyam

Kshetrajna sakshi chaitanyam is satyam

Kshetra anatama is mithya.

This means, when we say kshetra vastu is, the vastu is refers to kshetrajna only and not to kshetra vastu. Kshetra vastu is just the name and form the viseshanam. This is how the truth is seen, that when we say ghataH asti, it is actual mrtikka asti.

Same way when we say anything in jagat asti, or jagat asti, it is actually said atma asti, atma being the reality of the jagat.

So we dont have any opposition towards saying jagat asti, as we are merely stating a fact of oneself as existence. Saying jagat asti, is svarupa nitshta. aham asmi is svarupa nithta, and aham bhati is svarupa nishta. 

Brahman knowledge negates jagat

Knowledge that atma is kAranam brahman, negates the jagat.

jagat includes objects, so it negates all objects, by swallowing them and being brahman.

It negates subject also, swallowing subject and being brahman.

Now after subject and object are swallowed, how can I say I am brahman.

I am, isnt it the subject, no it isnt, I am, becomes brahman.

That brahman which swallows subject, and also swallows object, by being the swallower cause.

After having swallowed everything, brahman remains non negatable, as "is".

I 'is', pot 'is', table 'is', jagat 'is'.

So what 'is' remains.

Remains the word 'is'.


The 'isness' is brahma or atma svarupa.

It is nothing else.


Chaitanyam is also atma svarupa. Astitvam is also atma svarupa, sat.

Satchitanantam, anantam because it swallows, being the swallower cause, the satyam cause.

Thereby isness here belongs to this satyam cause atma, chit belongs to this satyam cause atma.

The nama rupa is a swallowable, a negatable nama rupa, it is not satyam, it is mithya in terms of reality.

By swallowing the mithya reality, satyatvam of the self is understood.


Q&A

1. What happens if I saw in 'table' is, is is my svarupa? I still dont see a I.
Why should I see an I ,' to see' is nothing bu chaitanya svarupam of myself, that itself is my svarupa.
My svarupa is seeing. In every seeing, I am present. Its due to me, there is such a thing as seeing.
So we cant say I dont see I, I is the very presence and cause for seeing itself. So in any and every seeing, I is.

So when we say sky 'is', how come the isness belongs to the very cause of seeing, since sky is an object and not the subject seer.

Thats because, sky gets swallowed by the cause the seer, despite being the seer, atma is also the cause as well, so is in fact swallowing the seen, in that swallowing seen becomes mithya , and seer becomes the cause, So the isness of seen gets swallowed by the seer, who is present in every act of seeing. 

Jnana SAdhanam

Aham brahmasmi is the purport of vedas.

Brahman is defined as satchitananda svarupam.

Brahman cannot be defined directly via description etc. as it is not available as an object.

Therefore lakshyartha is used for brahman to be defined.

Also svata siddha atma is brahman therefore brahma anubhava is not needed.

But atma is not understood as brahman, therefore brahmatvam has to be defined.

Brahmatvam means satchitanandatvam. Satchitananda svarupam.

Ones own rupam or nature by oneself, has to be satchitananada.

That oneself is sat and chit is self evident, but it is not self evident that one is anantam or limitless.

For that shastra pramanam is needed.

Shastra pramanam gives that knowledge via the mahavakya.

So in the mahavakya, the ahankAravAn jiva is equated to mayavi ishvara.

That equation is through jalajahal lakshana.

The anatma or mithya upadhis are not equatable.

It is only the reality or satyam that is equated, or rather is said to be one and the very same one.

That satyam is para atma brahma, satchitananda svarupa , sakshi chaitanyam.

So sakshi chaitanyam is the reality of ishvara, and is mistaken to be the jiva in when mistook as combined with body mind, when the limited attributes of body mind are superimposed on sakshi chaitanyam.

The ishvaratvam of sakshi chaitanya is what knocks off the limitation of sakshi chaitanya, as it is not possible for chaitanyam to be limited to body mind, and to be said to be ishvara who is jagat kAranam. Hence anantam is established , so its a chitanantam jiva (antaratma).

The remoteness of ishvara is also knocked off, when self chit itself is said to be ishvara. There for atma is satanantam ishvara ( isvara sarvabhutanam).

Thereby there is jiva isvara aikya jnanam with aham brahmasmi mahavakya.

Q&A on brahman

1. Does the universe and the individual (subject and object) have real existence of their own?

No, both subject and object have only borrowed existence. Existence does not belong to either subject or to object. Object and subject both borrow existence from brahman and brahman is neither the subject , nor the object.

2. If brahman is neither subject nor object, then how come we say knowing brahman one crosses sorrow (attains to moksa)?

Knowing brahman , is said so, in the sense of knowing oneself to be brahman, and oneself is already self evident , and need not be known. So in that sense it is said brahman has to be understood, to be oneself. So oneself am this non subject non object brahman , who is the reality that lends reality to both subject as well as object.

3. Does brahman have to do any action to become jagat kAranam brahman?

Brahman is actionless or akarta, existence and consciousness are the svarupa of brahman. The kAranam status of brahman is only when looking at brahman as saguna brahman, with traigunya maya shakti. This maya power of brahman is non separate from brahman , and with this power alone brahman becomes jagat kAranam.
Here brahman being satyam adhistanam and maya sahita brahman being mithya, brahman need not undergo any change.  Hence brahman is known as vivarta kAranam, with the kAranam status being mithya.

4. Does the individual have to do any action to become this brahman?

Individual IS this actionless brahman. When individual says 'I am' so and so, the 'I am' is brahman alone. Not knowing that he is brahman, he identifies with body mind etc. and says 'I am' so and so.
With knowledge and viveka, individual has to separate this 'so and so' as the anatama, and claim oneself to be the 'I am' atma, of the nature of existence and consciousness, and as brahman that lends consciousness and existence to all that is.

5. The individual , the jagat and the ishvara, are all 3 mithya?

Yes individual person with body mind, the physical universe and bhagavan, all 3 are mithya and are manifestations of brahman.

I am brahman who is manifest as all the 3.

6. When I manifest, what part of me changes?

It is the maya part which undergoes change, while I remain as the changeless substratum.

7. By whose will does this maya part change?

By will of brahman alone manifestation happens of unmanifest universe.

8. Does that mean brahman has will and controls the maya part?

Yes with maya part brahman is also the controller and makes use of maya and is the srshti karta.
This is a mithya reality.

9. If this is a mithya reality, then where is the need to realise brahman?

There is no need to realise brahman, as there is only brahman and nothing else.

10. I am, when it is said, is brahman being talked about?
Yes it is a name used for brahman, a pronoun. Aham is the prounoun, idam is also a pronoun. 

Svarupa of atma

Atma is self shining, and self existent.

It shines and with its shine, the mind sees, with its shine the eyes see, with its shine the world is seen.

It is due to the shining nature of atma, that the mind and body gains ability to see, and the world becomes that which is seen.
"Shrotrasya Shrotram, Manaso Manah, Sou prAnasya PranaH."
"Jyotisham JyotiH"

Atma is self existent. It is due to self existent nature of atma, that all that is here, is able to exist, and enjoy existence.

The existence that all things enjoy is the gift of atma.

All the entities that are 'seen' do not enjoy any existence of their own. They receive existence from atma.

isvarah sarva-bhutanam

Question is how do they receive this existence. They receive this existence due to tadAtmaya sambhanda. There is not a real sambhanda, but a projected sambandha. Just like sambandha of snake with rope, even though snake does not exist, it gains an erroneous existence, borrowing its existence from the rope.

Same way the seen objects of the universe gain an existence due to error born association with atma.

The error is an effect of ignorance, like any error is, this is the causal ignorance, mula Avidya.

Ignorance itself exists begininglessly, having its existence itself in atma alone.

While atma is free from ignorance, it is not opposed to ignorance.

The jiva is a person with a body mind, he finds himself bound and in a universe , whose ruler is ishvara the supreme being who has all the wealth, power , control, and great qualities, keeping the universe, its manifestation , resolution and sustenance under his control.

The jiva is a helpless hapless being holding onto strings of hope and looking for means to achieve permanent peace security and happiness.

Permanent peace, security and happiness however is the nature of atma and not of the jiva.

The fact however is that the jiva is in reality the atma, and due to the same ignorance because of which, the 'seen' objects are both projected AND are erroneously attributed with existence causing a tAdAtmaya sambandha with atma, the jiva inspite of being atma, appears to consider himself as the body, which is just an adhyasa in its enterity and not an entity in itself.

Since atma has no relation with this ignorance which gains existence depending on atma, atma remains also unopposed to adhyasa. This opposition is only within the standpoint of ignorance the cause , as in reality atma is free from the cause also, but within the projections of ignorance we are are talking about relation of ignorance with atma, with whom it has a relationship of mithya sathyam, dependently real and absolutely real.

"vAcharambhanam vikaro nAmadheyam"

Now this ignorance depending on atma, is unoppossed by atma , here atma that is present is known as imminent consciousness, again from consciousnes stanpoint no such immanence is there.

For ignorance to be removed , which is what a jiva should seek, in order to gain amrtatvamam, there needs to be the light of knowledge.

Knowledge can remove ignorance. In this case it becomes knowledge of the adhistAna, such as rope knowledge removing snake knowledge.

The interesting fact in the case of the jiva however is that , there is no need for a new knowledge, such as knowledge of the rope.

When the jiva says I, the I itself is the atma, the adhistana, such as the rope. Atma being self evident, self shining, shines as I. This I, is not known as adhistAna though, due to ignorance.

This adhistAna atma, gains status of seer with respect to body mind, status of seen objects since it is the vivarta kArana adhistAnam of the seen objects, upAdana karanam ignorance  being cause and is also vivarta kArana adhistAnam for the upAdana karanA mula avidya. By itself it is neither the seer, nor the seen, nor the kAranam, it is free from all such statuses, even status of being an adhistAna.

However, the jiva does not know he is this ever free chaitanyam. Due to ignorance he confuses himself to be the adhyaropita , in this case the body mind, limited to a body mind.

So the knowledge he needs is that, he is not the limited projected borrowed existence haverer 'body mind' , rather he is the limitless, self existent, and self shining atman.

So then he becomes the atma (as though ) which he always anyways was is and will be timeless limitless.

So due to this knowledge the ignorance is removed,

In the light of this knowledge, the entire vedanta shastra is seen as within the ambit of an ignorance based projection( mithya).

Atma along with the causal ignorance , has the status of being a srshti sthithi laya kArana, known as ishvara.  We dont say parameshvara in the absolute sense, but in the mithya reality there is parameshvara for sure. The jiva himself has no means of knowledge to remove ignorance. Ishvara who is all knowledge, wielding the mula avidya as his power (the vikshepa shakti of avidya) , can provide the knowledge of the adhistana. He has provided in the form of shruti, as the means of knowledge, and expounded by the guru, he himself being the original guru dakshnimurti, who taught others and initiated the guru parampara. This anadi parampara is what has lord shankaracharya as the link, so hence we say

SadAshiva samArabham, shankarAcharya madhyamAm, asmadAcharya paryantAm,
Vande guru paramparAm.

Doubts

1. Should I avoid experiences after jnanam

This is a question because atma is thought to be as a state. Atma is self evident I, and is not a to be known entity with a name and form. That being so, there is no question of experiencing atma, as atma is the self, as well as every experience is the experience of atma.
This is because atma alone with name and form is available as
seer
seen
knower
known and so on.

But in reality atma is free from these names and forms.
Such is the reality of this atma.

Atma cannot and need not avoid itself or oneself.

2. If shastra says I am ishvara, does that mean I am sthithi laya karana?

Sthithi and laya is definitely controlled by ishvara and this ishvara is not other than atma oneself.
However these are not the reality of atma, rather are the mithya reality. So I can see this ishvaratvam is my form and in reality I am formless, non doer. I appear as the srshti itelf, as well as its srshti karana, sthithi and laya karanam.

3. Is atma the seer?

Certainly seer is atma, but atma is not the seer only, atma is in fact the seen as well as seer of the seen. Atma is manifest and is available as both seer and the seen that is seen by the seer. But atma has not undergone any change, thereby it is only an apparent manifestation, atma has not become anyone or anything.

4. Why is there a tendency to search for atma inside the seen?

This is due to the search for completeness. I want to be complete and whole, and am seeking that which would make me complete and whole. I seek due to non awareness of myself being the whole, being all that is. I think, how can I be all that is, I cant do a little thing even.
This is due to total identification with body mind. From atma jnanam it is clear that I am the whole, all that is here is me. The moment I say that, I am not on one side , to be able to find me on the other side. If I am only the seer, I can try to see me, but given seen is me and seer is me, where is it that I am not, or what is it that I am not , so that should really mean an end to any kind of searching.

5. If I am manifest as all this, does that include all the good and bad, so wont that make me impure?
Not it wont, as I transcend all this.

6. If I say transcend, how to know the transcendental self, as self wont be seer or seen?
There is no need to know self, as self is self evident as I.

7. Isnt the self evident nature of I, mithya or a status, due to the presence of the mind
The self shiningness is not an attribute of I, it is atma svarupa. However the thought I am, or I is, is certainly due to presence of mind alone.
In the presence of mind, mind shines with the thought I , and the witness of this I thought is sakshi chaitanyam, which is self shining, the I thought refers to this or points to this sakshi chaitnayam only. This  self awareness gives the possibility of removal the causal ignorance which is beginning-less, as atma is now made available for knowledge as I, which even though is a thought shining in the mind, can be eventually used to make one understand the sakshitvam or self shining nature of oneself. Only its limitlessness and adhistAnatvam has to be communicated then via the mahavakya.

8. In spite of atma jnanam, so much is unknown, then how am I ishvara.

So much unknown is present in the mind, and is a limitation of the mind, and not of atma.
And so many are projections with various names and forms. Even if all names and forms do not reflect in the mind, its a fact cannot reflect in a limited mind that can know only 1 by 1, and not simultanously all at a time. However I can be all at the same time, since all known plus unkown has the adhistAnam as myself, I am the satyam brahma

9. Despite this clarity there is a desire to be unlimited

The desire is natural, as unlimitedness is ones own nature. There needs to be clarity that atma is not merely the seer at one end, but is in fact brahman, who is manifest as ishvara as this universe and as the seer, with maya shakti in a mithya reality that he rules and manifests as,  in reality is the reality that is brahman on dual. Also clarity that I am sakshi chaitanyam unmixed with the ego and so on.

10. If I am not even the seer, then I dont have a name and address?

Yes name and address are for the body mind, and not for atma, all names and addresses are in atma, and atma is free from any name or address.

11. How does one achieve jnana nishta

By resolving the entire universe, as being nothing but a kArya of atman, resolve the world in atman, and thereby also drop the causal status of atman, this will leave atman and atman alone. Thus enjoy oneself alone as atma samrajya the whole I am. This jnanam application via mananam and nidhidhyasanam leads to jnana nishta, which is nothing but sa svarupa jnanam, in ones own svarupa one naturally abides ever a brahman which oneself is .