Reality

I am the all pervading reality. Other than I, no being exists.
All beings with names and forms are, and what IS, is atma.

Atma is the truth, atma is the reality. In atma all that is here arises and subsides, all that is here is pure conscious being. When I say table is, table is conscious being, chair is conscious being, The name is incidental. It appears.

So people take the name to be the thing, and they go after it, and they fight, and there is an emotion an order sorrounding that, there is a person who keeps this in order, the whole thing is due to avidya. The order keeper is also within avidya, but is not affected by the avidya ,as he knows the truth, but even his power and so on is due to avidya having a overlordship.

So bhagavtvam is due to the overlordship of avidya, and jivatvam is due to the avarana shakti of avidya. Avidya itself is mithya , has its being in satyam atma. And with this avidya as bhagavan manifests, and jivas manifest and they go after things, and they fight over things, and avidya projects those, bhagavan projects these things as per order, as per the karma phala, and maintains order as visnu and resolves as rudra, and all this with total power and control over what is projected for whom, including projecting time and so on. It is all the play of avidya with which he conducts this srshti.

That he is non separate from I, that he is I, and I am free from heness, but He is I.
She or He anything could be said to be bhagavan.

Knowing thus, there is nothing else to be known. There is no one else to be known, there is no other thing to be gained. All that is is me. What can I gain?

Gain and loss is due to avidya, its the play of avidya alone, and one is attracted due to avidya again.

Liberation or Moksa

From years of vedantic shravanam from pujya swamiji and all of the mahatmas and gurus I have concluded that the vision of vedanta is real. Even though it appears contradictory when self is equated to ishvara, that's due to ajnana , which itself is said to be beginingless. 

The shruti  through words of masters such as pujya swamiji and all of the gurus who are following his words , is revealing , in the manner as it is supposed to be taught, that despite the seeming 'implausibile' ness of the mahavakya, I am the chaitanya svarupa chidatman who is sadatman..

That I am the only source of existence, is an undeniable experience , that I can find in every experience ( that I AM , as the listener, the seer, the knower in all sense organs and the mind). 

And that I am indivisible, without borders, without limitations, is revealed by shastra. My experience and knowledge from other pramanas, has nothing to say about myself the pramata, so there is no contradiction there to shruti, shruti being an independent pramana.

That this jagat, is the manifestation of bhagavan, is also a very evident truth, and pujya swamiji in his inimitable style which is again steeped in the tradition, has explained how this manifestation is pure knowledge and order. I knock on a table, there is a sound, and I am instantly in touch with the knowledge of the maker. I am instantly in touch with the material who is the maker himself. And this maker material ishvara being mithya , both clear when you apply a little bit of logic (that any entity can be resolved into is substantive) , and also this being told in the shruti as well, this jagat, which I now see as ishvara (material and maker), is mithya. Mithya means totally non separate from the satyam, all the way, it is maya sahita chaitanyam, and I am that chaitanyam, consciousness.

So when I speak there is speech , as I speak, there is devi the goddess of speech, there is the organ of speech, there is a mind I have accumulated, all this due to the shakti that is , I can see non separate from me the consciousness, whilst in svarupa I remain the non doer , with maya shakti I alone appear as though as this jagat, and as ishvara , and all its beings. including this my own body mind. Body mind with its own prarabdha karma, I alone appeared as a ignorant jiva, and through shravana phala, I alone am enjoying the truth of myself, and such is the power of a guru.

It is often a valid question, when how a totally useless, powerless, tapas less, pitiful creature , could even dream of attaining such a lofty goal as moksha. For that it can be said is that all he needs is the punya to reach a teacher. It is then the greatness of the teacher that can give this moksa. So that lofty goal is impossible as such for a pitiful jiva, but in association and acceptance of a teacher, the greatness of the teacher is able to make this a possibility for the student. Such is the greatness of the guru. So kabirdas was not a fool when he said , 

"Guru Govind dono khade kake lagu paay. Balihari Guru aapki Govind diyo batay. "

Tasmai shri gurave namaH.

OM

Jiva chaitanyam is Brahma chaitanyam.
But Brahma chaitanyam is caught in body mind as though it's limited to body mind. Brahma chaitanyam never got limited to body mind.
Brahma chaitanyam has maya upadhi. With this upadhi it's isvara chaitanyam.

That's why jagat is mithya not satyam.

Iavaratvam is mithya.

Iavaratvam includes the ajnanam, this ajnanam makes same Brahma chaitanyam as jiva.

Aham Brahmasmi

Aham brahmasmi is a mahavakya.


All that is here is brahman. All that is here is subject and object.

Object IS, subject IS. There is only one IS and that IS brahman.

Atma IS.

Here object has attributes, subject is the seer of attributeful thing.


Seer seen division is there.

This seer seen division has to be accepted to be real at one level, but not at another level.

At ultimate level, the seer seen division is understood to be kalpitam, or appearance , in the screen that IS neither the seen or the seer.

That which is neither seen or seer, and in which both seer and seen are, is the atma or brahman.

I do not know anything other than seer and seen. Seer and seen covers all understanding I have of the jagat.

I have to however not confuse myself to be either just limited to being seer. I have to understand myself to be that brahman which is both seer and seen.

My limiting myself, I give up my brahmatvam.

I know that I am, is my self evident nature, it is not the fact of me being limited to the seer.

That the seer is me, is clear as there is no possibility of confusion due to drk drshya viveka.

Even here a viveka is needed, otherwise I believe myself to be limited to the body.

Through viveka this much alone can be inferred.

But through a new shastra pramana, this can also be negated.

That I am limited to being a seer, is not something that I have access to.

It is also an inference, as I 'see'. I know that I see, because I seeing here is the nature of chaitanyam to shine.

The seeing is something only with respect to the mind, I say I am seer.

Otherwise I should only say that I am the self shining entity.

So I am the self shining entity, I am the seer with respect to the mind, here knowledge ends about me, for want of a pramana.

Now pramana comes in and says, I am brahman, from me all that is here arose, due to my will and resolved unto me.

For this I dont have any pramana other than shastra.

So here I am ishvara is being said.

But I have to understand this through lakshyartha, by looking at truth of ishvara, to say I am ishvara.

And truth of jagat as well.

So I retain myself as just self shining entity and entity IS. And this entity IS ishvara says pramana.

Now if this entity also has the attribute of ishvaratvam, and ahankara or antahkarana, then this entity is non dual .

So myself with the upadhi of maya am this jagat and ishvara, myself with antahkarana is jiva.

All is chaitanyam

Ok, I understand all is chaitanyam, but chaitanyam I am, for that there is no new knowledge needed right. Isnt that because I am already self evident, I am the sakshi, the knower in all kind of knowledge.

I am seer, seer of the eye that sees, seer of the thought that is seen by the eye that sees, seeing that eye sees and thought IS.

So I am not a seen, I am the pure seer, prajnanam. This prajnanam, that I am , is satyam all pervasive.

When I say space IS, space is prajnanam brahma.

Space the name and form belongs to brahman ( same way as pot belongs to clay, while clay transcends pot).

So when I think of space, then atma is included in every thought , in the knowledge of everything atma is satyam. All knowledge is atma.

But here atma is not knowledge, atma is the reality of knowledge, so anantam jnanam it is.

So atma is retained as it is, and understood to be reality of knowledge. It is already reality of knower, so being reality of knowledge , its not limited to knower, thereby reality of both knowledge and knower. Anantam jnanam is of course satyam jnanam anantam brahma. 

Atma Prarthana

To know the self as the whole should be the atma prarthana.

This is because the self atma, is in fact the indivisible whole. There is no division in atma.
It is the qualities and ignorance that create a semblance of an as though division.
However atma is the satyam chit, the self, the bhati sat atma, which is the reality of both inferior attributeful atma known as jiva and superior maya attributeful atma known as ishvara.

In fact so called jiva is also pervaded by maya attributeful ishvara alone.

So this attributeful atma is mithya, and attributeless atma is non dual satyam.

Knowing thus I become or attain to my own wholeness. I see wholeness everywhere.

Seeing thus I am free from birth and rebirth, and attain to my svarupa which is being whole.

Within me the outcome holds no value
The outcome does not belong to the experiencer. The outcome is at best a learning tool if at all it holds a learning within.

Within me I am a doer alone. A doer who is fulfilled by the to be done . By doing the to be done I am free from doership. What I like is the freedom from doership. When I take care of the to be done the doership is suspended and I am free from doership. I am whole. I like being whole.

I trust the to be done. My duty is another person's right. By taking care of my duty I take care of everyone's right. My families rights my child wife society worlds rights. I do what I have to do. What is to be done.

A life of to be done is a life of simplicity. The eating the living the enjoying is a enjoyment of the self. And all exertion is for the to be done action. All desire is towards the to be done. All enthusiasm is for what is to be done .

In fact I am eager to perform what is to be done. What is to be done is an expression of my fulfilment. Is a expression of my freedom.

It shows my freedom from binding desires. It shows my love for harmony. My love for totality. My love for ishvara.

To be done is my elixir. To be done action nourishes me with more power. With pure satisfaction. Outcome is always a milestone. There is no final outcome.

There is only ever a series of to be done actions. And there is an ever changing endless goalpost.

The goalpost is not an end. It's merely a means.

A means to perform to be done action.

I respct the goalpost. I welcome the goalpost. As it gives me clarity in what is to be done.

It sets itself. It comes to me sometimes. Sometimes my to be done could be to set the goal. Not as an ends but again as a means.

So what to I achieve out of to be done.

I merely achieve who I am. The harmonious whole. The synchronised instrument in the orchestra of the Divine whole.

Being that instrument is a great privilege. To take ones place in the choir is am achievement in itself. And the Divine music continues to entertain. The song continues to sing. As to sing is thy resolve and they resolve is the love. The love for all beings. Love that comes from being the whole being secure and being all encompassing and being the mother for all. It includes all and nurtures all and provides for all.

It is that whole that I connect with and gives me the to be done and the goal post it's no more a means. It's merely a gratitude to the Divine for giving me this Divine life.

This life wherein I can enjoy myself as the whole. As the Divine. As Brahman. As ishvara.

As long as one is alive this body is and as long as body is I am a dorr. Why not do what is to be done. As a doer I always do both in action as well as inaction I remain a doer. Why not be counted amongst the doers of the to be done.

That way I fulfill myself as a living doer. It's a fulfilling use of doership.

Agreed doership maybe suspended for a jnani after knowledge. But even for a jnani while doership may not give jnanam doesn't it give meaning for the doer.

Really speaking the to be done action is not binding one me. I am not affected as I have no birth and no real doership.

Then what is given as the garb of doer what I do with it I can choose the best .

And the best I can do with it is indeed the to be done action. To be done nourishes the doer and that around him.

To be done is indeed the best action for oneself and for all. Praising the to be done I do the to be done for the sake of everyone and all that is here. I consider it a privilege. Wow what a great action I can do.
Om.