Gowdapadha has established that nondual
Brahman alone is there, and this Brahman was non dual, is non dual and it will
ever be non-dual.  If there is any duality, it is mithya.  From 31st
verse onwards Gowdapatha wants to talk about samsara and its remedy. 
Cause of samsara is missing advaidam which is sathyam and taking mithya dwaidam
as sathyam.

• Not having advaida dharshanam and remaining only in
  dvaida dharshanam is the cause of samsara.
• Running after is pravirthi and running away is nivirthi
  and this is one root of samsara.
• As long as I see duality, there is limitation by desa
  and kala; As long as there is time and space limitation there will be
  mortality and there will be insecurity and samsara; raga dwesha is
  samsara.  Punarabi jananm and puranabi maranam is samsara.

Whatever is the cause of samsara the
root cause is lack of advaida dharshanam.  In sushukthi there is no
duality and there is no samsara.  From this conclude that wherever there
is duality there is samsara.  This dwaida dharshanam happens when only
when the mind is active.  In Jagradha avastha and Swapna avastha there is
dwaida dharshanam.  The dwaida dharshanam happens only in mind and mind is
the cause of samsara.  If you tackle the mind, samsara is tackled. 
This entire dualistic world charam (moving, living) and acharam (stationary and
not living) is presented by the mind.  Mind alone imports dwaida prabanja
for me.  By introducing dwaida prabanja, mind is introducing
samsara.  So, if you want to tackle samsara, tackle mind.  When the
mind is resolved, (mano nasaha) or negated or eliminated one will not have
duality.  This is proved by our sleep state.  The goal should be mano
nasaha or elimination of mind.  How do you bring this about?

Verse 32

Mano nasaha is a confusing word if
it is taken literally.  Mano nasaha is not physical destruction of mind,
but it has philosophical meaning. Understanding mind as mithya is mano nasaha. 
Manomaya is anatma and mithya and does not have reality of its own. 
Falsification of the mind is mano nasaha; there is no substance called mind
separate from atma.  This is figuratively called destruction of
mind.  Similar to vedantic destruction of pot.  You can destroy the
pot by knowledge by understanding there is no substance called pot. 
Reducing pot into non substantial nama roopa is called destruction of
pot.  After this, you only say clay was, clay is, and clay will be the
pot.

By knowing there is no substance
called universe, but only one substance called atma.  Universe is non substantial
nama roopa.  This understanding of universe as non-substantial nama roopa
is called destruction of the world.  Within the world, there is mind
also.  When you reduce world to non-substantial nama roopa, mind is also
included.  Mind is also a non-substantial nama roopa.  This
understanding mano nasaha.

When you “destroy” the
pot, you continue to handle pot.  Similarly, a gyani continues to negate
the world, but there is no cessation of perception of knowledge of world. 
Gyani will continue to use the mind, body, world and he will say there is no
such called mind, body and world but only one substance called atma.  This
must be very clearly understood.  Many people think that a gyani has
physically destroyed mind.

• Mind should not be destroyed; If liberation is
  destruction of mind, all liberated people will be without mind; then there
  will be no difference between a liberated person and a rock. Then you
  can’t talk about virtue of love, compassion.  If gyani’s mind is
  destroyed, all people with mind will be agyani that will include gurus.
• The mind can’t be destroyed; Mind can’t be destroyed
  because mind has there since creation; and death does not destroy
  mind.  Mind can’t be physically destroyed.
• Mind need not be destroyed.  Vedanta repeatedly
  declares, everything other than atma is mithya.  A mithya vasthu does
  not really exist.  Why should I try to destroy an unreal mind? 
  Rope snake need not be destroyed.  You don’t need to anything other
  than understand it is unreal, no other effort is needed to destroy the
  rope snake.

Just understand mind is mithya and
this understanding is figuratively called mano nasaha.  You don’t attack
the dream world; you just wake up to waker nature; the dream world
automatically collapses.  Don’t struggle to destroy the mind; just know
the sathya atma which is the content of mithya mind.  Just like sathya
clay is the content of mithya pot.

Knowledge does not take place
automatically.  If you remove the thought, previously you are thoughtfully
ignorant, and now you are thoughtlessly ignorant.  Guru sathraa upadesham
is required.  When this takes place, the ignorant mind is converted to a
wise mind; an enlightened mind through knowledge.  A wise mind perceives
dwaidam but knows it is mithya; just like sun rise and sun set are mithya, but
we still keep calling it sun rise and sun set.  A wise mind that does not
see duality is as good as no mind, because it can’t cause samsara.  At the
time of wisdom, the mind becomes non mind.  Since perceived duality is
negated, the mind is a non-perceiver mind.  It is a perceiver at the same
time it not a perceiver because it does not see any duality as real.

Verse 33

In this verse, Godwapadha discusses
uniqueness of atma gyanam; this is different from any other worldly
gyanam.  In other knowledge subject, object and instrument distinction;
prmadha (subject) premayam (object) and the knowing instrument (pramanam)
thrupudi is there.  In atma gyanam, the subject and object both happens to
be thuriyum, me, I am the knower and I am the known.  What is the
instrument of knowledge; the atma itself is the instrument of knowledge. 
We don’t require any other external pramanam because everything else is illluminated
by atma.  Atma knows itself by itself; I know myself by myself.  I am
the subject; I am the object and I am the instrument.  There is no
thirupudi.  I am self-evident.

If atma reveals by itself, then what
is the role of guru and sasthra?  Guru and sathra are not required to
reveal atma.  Atma is ever experienced and evident; it is the nature of
consciousness.

Class
42

The Upanishad describes features of
Brahman, we come across a logical problem that two features of Brahman
contradict each other.  One feature is nirvikaram, not subject to modification,
beyond time and space, eternal and all pervading; free from all modiifcation
caused by time.  The same upanishad describe Brahman as jagat karanam –
nimitha karanam or upadhana karanam – word karanam implies subject to
modification. In one place it is nirvikaram and another place it says it is
savikaram.   The only way to reoncile is one is sathyam and another is
mithya.  Opposite words can co-exist only in different planes.  Which
one is mithya savikaram or nivikaram?  Savikaram – the karanam status
-alone should be taken as mithya.  Once karanam status is taken as mithya
and the world created by the karanam status is also mithya.  Mithya
karanam can only create mithya kariyam.  Gowdapadha gave spiritual
quotation to support this conclusion in verses 24 to 26.  Gowdapadha gives
logical support for the logical conclusion in verses 27 to 30.

The origination of world out of
Brahman is possible only in one way – through Maya – apparently or seemingly or
unreal.  Real creation is not at all possible out of Brahman.  If you
assume a creation originates out of Brahman, if the world is a kariyam and then
Brahman will become Karanam.  If Brahman is a real cause of the universe
then Brahman is subject to modification, becoming savikaram.  If Brahman
has modification, then you should accept the six fold modification. One of the
modification is jenma, that is subject to birth.  That means Brahman will
become kariyam, then it will require its karanam.  You will never be able
to arrive at logical conclusion at all.  Brahman will become subject to
birth and death and will become a samsari.

Verse 28.

From a sat vasthu ( Brahman)
produces a world, it can only be only a mithya or unreal world.

From an asat vashtu (nonexistent
cause) neither a real nor unreal creation can exist.  Sunya vadha
philosophers say Brahman did not produce world, but it came from sunyam. 
Son of a woman who is vandhya – incapable of giving birth (a baron woman), can
never be born either really or apparently.  Real creation is not possible
from sat or asat.

Verse 29

The world we see can only be
mithya.  How can I accept this solid world as unreal?  This world
appears to be very real.  The world is clearly visible, tangible, useful,
gives me sugam and dhukkam and all of these are very real.  Just because
the world is visible, tangible, useful, gives you problem you can’t conclude it
is real because an unreal world can also be visible, tangible, useful and give
your problem.  Tangibility does not prove reality.  Experience does
not prove reality.  Utility does not prove reality.  The unreal dream
world is also tangible when you are in dream.  Unreal dream world appear
real in dream state and unreal waking world appear real in waking state. 
So Jagrath prabanja and swapna prabanja are unreal.  Both are unreal when
the state is reshuffled.  When you go to sushukthi both are unreal.

Let us assume another state of
experience (other than swapna and waking) where you get another body, space,
time etc. in that state also mind perceives dwaida basham or dwaida
experience;  All dwaida experiences are mithya.  Vaikunda , kailasa,
Brahma loga are all dwaida and mithya.  Advaidam alone sathyam.  If
we go to nirvakalpaka samathi would advaidam Brahman stand in front of
you?  No because it is also dvaidam.  Advaidam is not a matter or objectification
of experience.  Don’t look into going to another state of experience to
see Brahman.  If you do, there will be an experiencer and experience with
duality.  All dwaidam is mithya.

Verse 30

The non-dual mind alone appears as
duality in dream.  In dream, there is only one object – mind.  Mind appears as dream objects; mind seemingly
convert itself into dream objects and create the seeming duality.  Mind itself makes a seeming division. 
Because when you wake up, you can shake off the entire dream world. 
Similarly, the non-dual Brahman alone seemingly appears as duality in waking
state.  That Brahman I am.  I alone appear as the world.  Just
as the waker boldly say I am the tiger, mountain etc. in dream, a gyani can say
I alone appear as the world.

The four topics discussed by
Gowdapatha: 

1. Yuktyya jiva shrity nishedhaga:  Logical negation
   of jiva shristy (Vereses 3 to 9)
2. Yukthya jagat shristy nisedhagaha:  Logical
   negation of jagat shrisy (Verse 10)
3. Shruthya jiva shristy nishedhaha:  Scriptural
   negation of jiva shristy (Verses 11 to 14)
4. Shruthya jagat shrisy nishedhaha:  Scriptural
   negation of jagat shristy. (Verses 15 to 30)

With this these four topics are
completed.  Taken together this means there is never jiva shrishti nor
jagat shrishti; there is no shrishti; there is no kariyam.  Therefore,
Brahman is not a karanam.  He is kariya karana Brahma vilakshyanam or
advaidam thiriyum.  The significance of the word advaidam is kariya karana
vilakshanam

Verse 31

All samsara problem is caused by
duality.  The dream perception of duality causes problem because it makes
me forget the advaidam, the mind;  dwaida
dharshanam is the cause of samsara.  Advaida dharshanam is the solution for samsra.

In jagradha avastha, you have dwaida
avastha, you have kama, krodha, moha, laya etc.  In sushukthi there is no
dwaidam and we experience moksha temporarily.  When dwaida dharshanam
there is problem  Dwaida dharshanam is very much there when the mind is
active.  In jagradh and swapna mind is active; in sushukthi mind is
resolved, there is neither dwaidam or samsara.  In jagradh and swapnma the
mind is active and there is samsara problem.  When the mind is active,
there is problem and when the mind is not there, there is no problem.  The
mind is the culprit.  In deep sleep there is world, but it does not cause
samsara.  Therefore for moksha, you have to tackle your own mind. 
Tackling the mind, conquering the mind (amani bava) are dealt with in verses 31
to 39.

While studying the nature of Brahman, we face a peculiar problem and that problem is some of the features of Brahman are contradictory to one another.  Main contradiction is in the description of Brahman as nirvikaram and jagat karanam.  The word nirivkaram means not subject to change; The same Upanishad also calls Brahman as upadhana karanam or material cause.  Any material cause produces an effect only by undergoing modification.  Examples:  Seed to tree, milk to curt, gold to chain.  If Brahman is nirvikaram he can’t be Jagat Karanam.  As both attributes are given by the same Veda and we can’t ignore this contradiction.  We have to accept and assimilate the contradiction.  If two opposite attributes remain in one and the same substance, then one must be real attribute and the other unreal; one is higher order and the other is lower order.  In dream we travel in train, while laying still in bed.  This is possible because travel belong pradhibasika sathyam and motionless belong to vyavakarika sathyam.  Nirvikaram is paramarthika sathyam and savikaram is vyavakarika sathyam.  Once you know that savikaram is mithya, then karanam status is mithya or Brahman is not real cause of the universe.  If the Brahman is unreal cause, the universe born out of unreal Brahman, then the universe is unreal. 

 This conclusion is supported by Upanishad by
many sruthi vakyam:

1. Na eha Nana:  It occrs in 2.1.11 Katha Upanishad. 
   “Neha nanasthi kinchana” is the full statement meaning there is
   no plurality at all; there is no subject/object/instrument
   plurality.  The Upanishad is making the statement in present tense,
   indicating there is no plurality even now when you are able to see
   plurality.  The perceived plurality is not absolute reality. 
   Just like dream perceived plurality is not reality.  Solidified ignorance
   is matter.  From the body stand point, this world is real but
   thuriyum standpoint this world is mithya.
2. Indhro Mayabihi:  Occurs in Brahadharanya
   Upanishad 2.5.19; Here the word Indra stands for Brahman.  The non-dual
   Brahman assumes the pluralistic for of the universe through Maya (only
   apparently).
3. Ajaya Manaha Bahudha:  From Purusha Suktham 21st
   Mantra.  Brahman becomes pluralist world without
   producing.   Brahman creating plurality without creating
   plurality; it is as though produced but really not produced. 
   Conclusion:  The universe is seeming production there is no real
   universe.  We produce dream object with nidhra sakthi which includes
   avaruna sakthi (veiling power) and vikshebak sakthi (projecting power). 
   Avaruna sakthi which covers the fact that you are lying down on the bed;
   this is the avaruna sakthi of nidhra.  The viksheba sakthi (projecting
   power) activates all vasanas in your mind and apparent world is
   projected.  If we can do this, Brahman can create the universe. 
   In the case of Brahmna only viksheba sakthi alone functions.

Verse 25

4.  In the mantra 2 of Eesawasya
Upanishad, the teacher criticizes and negates hiranya karbha upasana. 
This is the criticism of Hiranya Karbha itself.  By criticizing and negating
hiranya garbha is negation of the whole creation.  Hiranya Karbha is first
born or first kariyam, if that is criticized, then it is as good as criticizing
the whole universe.  It is criticized because it is not sathyam it is
mithya and the Upanishad says don’t go after hiranya garbha the mithya vasthu,
but go after the Sathyam brahman.  The first born hiranya garba is criticized,
by that way the whole world is criticized.  The very fact the Upanishad
negates the world, it is mithya.

5.  Brahadharanay Upanishad
3.9.27.7:  Jadhanayeva jayathe….:  Jivatma is never born, even
though we all have the misconception.  If jivatma is to be born, who can
create the jivatma?  There is no creator of jivatma and therefore there is
no jivatma creation; the creation we see is misconception or a second layer of
dream.

Verse 26

Brahadharanya 3rd chapter 9 th
section 26th mantra:  Here the Upanishad introduces the whole world as
moortha (tangible) amortha (non-tangible like energy, mind, thought, emotion
etc.) universe.  Sthula sarerream is moortha prabanja; sukshma sareeram
amoortha prabanaja; The Upanishad says the entire moortha and amoortha prabanja
is not the truth.  First nethi is negate moortha prabanja and second nethi
is to negate amoortha prabanja.  Whatever you objectify is not atma;
whatever you experience is not atma.  If not all this is not atma tell me
how to experience atma?  Atma is not a thing to experience.  It is
nothing but I, the experiencer, the consciousness which is experienced by me
all the time.  Since it is not an object of experience, the Upanishad
negates every object of experience.  When you negate all objects, what
remains is consciousness principle which illumines the nothingness.  The
witness of the blankness, the nothingness is the I the unobjectifiable
consciousness.  Consciousness is not something you can look and
contact.  It is ever evident similar to how a teacher knows a student is
in the class the for the entire class.

Verse 27

From verse 24 to 26 Gowdapadha
established that the world is unreal by scriptural analysis in six mantras (3
mantras in verse 24; 2 mantras in verse 25; one mantra in verse 26)  and proved
that world is mithya.  From verse 27 to 30, Gowdapadha says even the
logical analysis will lead to same conclusion.  You can never logically
prove a creation; if you say there is a creation born, then you will have to
say what is the cause.  You can’t talk about an effect without cause.

In verses 17th to 22nd, Gowdapadha is taking a diversion to criticize the dualistic system of philosophy and to establish advaidam.  His main aim is not to criticize dualistic system.  The main idea is that journey from bondage to moksha can’t be from dwaidam to dwaidam.  Because very dwaidam is the cause of bondage; wherever there is subject and object division, there is time and space.  Once there is time, space comes then there is mortality.

1. Once there is mortality, fear and insecurity can’t be avoided.  As long as there is subject object division, there will be insecurity.  Therefore, freedom from bondage is freedom from insecurity.
2. Wherever there is division, there will be raga dwesha and which is another form of bondage.
3. Whenever there is division there is comparison there will be jealousy which is another form of bondage.

Moksha is:

1. Not a journey from dwaidam to dwaidam.  Going to heaven or kailasa or vaikundam is travel from dwaidam to dwaidam
2. Journey from dwaidam to advaidam.  Journey from bondage to liberation; Moksha is a journey from dwaidam to advaidam.  Because only in advaidam there is no division, no mortality, no raga dwesha or comparison or jealousy.  The best proof is our sleep where there is no question of raga dwesha etc.
3. Journey from dwaidam to advaidam can never be a physical journey.  Because advaidam is not a physical place. It is a journey from ignorance to knowledge.  Because of ignorance I see a seemingly duality and I go to non-duality from waking up from seeming duality to real non duality.

Owning up advaidam is
liberation.  If advaidam is either a destination reached in time or an
event produced in time that advaidam will not be permanent.

Verse 23

Advaidam alone is liberation. That
advaidam is beyond time and space, not subject to modification.  It must
be advaidam in the past, it must be advaiam in the present and it must be
advaidam in the future.  That advaidam is kariya karana vilakshanam and
that advaidam does not produce anything including jiva shrishti and jagat
shrishti.    He is scripturally negating the creation from verse
15.  After the diversion, he comes back to the original topic of shristi
negation by sruthi.

Now Gowdapadha clarifies a doubt
that may arise.  The doubt is if creation has not come out of Brahman,
then why do the scriptures talk about creation often?  The upanishads does
not say whether the scriptures accept the creation temporarily for the sake of teaching
and discarded later or whether it is real creation which has to be
accepted.  Is it apparent temporarily accepted or real creation accepted
as creation?  Sruthi does not say whether it is sathya shrishti or mithya
shrishti.  We advaidins are willing to accept the creation but we insist
up on that it is an apparent creation like Swapna.  Dualistic people will
say there is a real creation coming out of Brahman.  Sruthi does not
support either one of us – dwaidam or advaidam; sathya shrishti or mithya
shrishti.  One must study veda comprehensively, which is called mimamsa or
samanvaya (impartial).  Six factors should be taken and finally arrive at
whether creation is accepted by sruthi and you will come to conclusion sruthi
never accepted creation.  Study the scriptures totally (mimamsa) and apply
reasoning.  Unreasonable interpretation is not accepted.  Use
sravanam and mananm and arrive at the conclusion and that alone should be
accepted.

Verse 24

In these three verses (24 to 26)
Gowdapadha shows how to analyze scriptures also known as sravanam or mimamsa or
tatpariyam.  Sruthi does not explicitly say whether creation is real
(sathyam) or unreal (Mithyam).  The word nischitham comes in 23 and that
is explained in 24 to 26; the word yukthi yuktham comes in verse 23 and that is
explaining in verses 27 to 30.

Swamiji’s example is from Tatiretya
Upanishad’s panca kosa viveka, where the pranamaya is temporarily accepted as
Brahman.  If you read further, the Upanisahd makes startling statement
negating creation.

In Kaivalya Upanishad it talks about
creation.  It says from Brahman the five elements are born.  The
conclusion should be since five elements are born out of Brahman; we have in
front of us five elements.  But the Upanisahds says therefore in front of
us there is no creation at all.  It says there is no world in front of
us.  So, the Upanishad concludes a real world did not come out of Brahamn
and only apparently creation came out of Brahman and that apparent creation is
as good as no creation.  Anything apparent is a perception born out of
ignorance.  This is not a stray statement occurring only in Kaivalya
Upanishad, it occurs in all upanishads.

Gowdabadhachariyar cites three
quotations given in these verses

1. “Na eha Nana”:  It occurs in 2.1.11 Katha Upanisahd.  “Neha nanasthi kinchana” is the full statement meaning there is no plurality at all; there is no subject-object-instrument plurality.  The upanishad is making the statement in present tense, indicating there is no plurality at all, even though you are able to see plurality now.  The perceived plurality is not absolute reality.  Just like dream perceived plurality is not reality.  Solidified ignorance is duality; matter; consciousness is the only fact,
2. “Indhro Mayabihi”:  Occurs in Brahadharanya Upanishad 2.5.19
3. “Ajaya Manaha Bahudha”:  From Purusha Suktham 21st Mantra
4. “Nethi nethi” in Brahadharanya upanishad.

To establish advaidam nature of
thuriyum, Gowdapadha is showing that thuriyum is not a kranam at all because
any karanam is potential dwaidam to produce kariyam.  To establish this,
Gowdabadha uses four methods.  In this portion of diversion, Gowdabadha
strongly criticizes all dwaidin who believes that there is a creation born out
of Brahman.  From an advaidin stand point:

• No creation is born out of Brahman or
• Apparent creation is born out of Brahman, meaning a
  real creation is not born at all.

Gowdapadha says dwaidin face many
problems:

• Emotional: When duality will be real and ragha
  dwesha can’t be avoided creating samsara and sorrow.  Different point
  of views can’t be avoided, and each person’s point of view will be correct
  from that person’s point of view.  This is because of pramanam
  (instrument) used is different.  In the relative world of dwaidin, there
  will be differences.   Advaidin transcend reality and avoids
  raga dvesha; whereas a dwaidin can’t transcend relalty.
• Logical:  They all say paramtma or baghawan or
  Brahman is infinite, which means beyond time and space and not subject to
  modification.  It will be nirvikaram.  Whatever is not subject
  to modification, can’t be a karanam.  Therefore, infinitude and
  karanam status can’t co-exist.  Infinitude is nirvikarathvam
  (changeless) and karanatvam is savikaratvam (changing nature).  Therefore,
  infinitude and karanam can’t co-exist.  Therefore Baghawan, the
  infinite, can’t be a cause of creation.
• If Brahman is really multiplying to produce a creation,
  it will mean that infinite has become finite.  The changeless has
  become changing.  That beyond time has come within time.  This is logically not possible.

Verse 20

The disputants wish to ascertain the
birth of birth-less Reality itself.  How can the birth less, immortal
Readily indeed undergo mortality?

Gowdapadha wonders how all other
philosophers don’t recognize this logical fallacy.  They claim that
infinite, timeless, changeless, birth-less Brahman is changing when he produces
creation, essentially making a changeless changing.  Brahman does not have
any of the six modifications:  asti, jāyate,
vartate, vipariṇāmate, apakṣīyate, and vinaśyati.  Infinite can’t become finite; finite can’t
become infinite.

Verse 21

The immortal does not become
mortal.  In the same way the mortal does not become immortal. 
Transformation of the intrinsic nature does not take place anyhow.

Important verses, if you understand
these verses, importunate of knowledge and moksha will be clear.

A finite thing can never become
infinite and an infinite thing can never become finite.  Infinite can’t
become anything because becoming itself implies change, within time and space.
Will mortal become immortal or immortal become immortal? Mortal can’t become
immortal by any amount of sadhana.  Immortal need not become
immortal.  Therefore, moksha is dropping the struggle for moksha with the
knowledge that I am already muktha.  If you are intrinsically mortal,
don’t work for immortal because you will not become immortal.  If you are
immortal, then you do not need to do sadhana for immortal.  If at all you
do sadhana, it is not to become immortal but to own up the fact that I need not
work for muktha; it is only for reminding that I am already a muktha.

Verse 22

If the intrinsically immortal
Reality undergoes mortality for a person how can that immortality remain the
same for him, since it is a product?

Two types of nature are incidental nature
and intrinsic nature; hot coffee is incidental, because it become hot by
contacting heat; it is subject to loss; if you keep the coffee outside it will
become cold.  The heat obtained in fire is intrinsic and the fire will
never lose the hotness.  Brahman infinitude is intrinsic nature and will
not lose infinitude.  For the sake of argument, let us assume that the
intrinsic nature also undergoes change.  We fell from paramatma and became
jivatma.  Jivatma does the sadhana and one day the jivatma becomes
paramatma.  If you become immortal paramata on a future date, that
immortality is an event produced in future time.  But if Moksha or
infinitude happens in time, that is also finite.  A moksha produced in
time can’t be eternal.  The word moksha is permanent freedom from samsara
and not a temporary freedom from samsara.  In the dualistic philosophy
moksha will not be possible because for all of them moksha is an event in
time.  Here intrinsically immortal Brahman becomes mortal.  If
produced moksha can be eternal, then that will mean produced swarga can also be
permanent.  Wherever there is a logical inconsistency, the dualist will
ask you to believe.  A dualist says an moksha is an event in time and it
is eternal.  Even though it is illogical, they ask you to belive it. 
An advaidin says retain your intellect.  If moksha is an even time, it
can’t be permanent.  Therefore, eternal moksha is a belief in dwaidam, and
eternal moksha is only possible in advaidam.

In four stages, Gowdapadha is
establishing that either the jiva nor jagat is born out of Brahman and
therefore Brahman the thuriyum is not a karanam at all.  First, he logically
established the non-origination of jiva and jagat.  Now he is scripturally
establishing the non-origination of jiva and jagat.  Now we are in the
fourth topic, the scriptural negation of jagat.  When Gowdapadha says that
world is not born out of Brahman two points should be remembered:

1. Gowdapadha only negates the creation of real world and
   negates only the creation of apparent world.
2. From the Thuriyum stand point alone the world is
   unreal.  From the stand point of out body mind complex, the world has
   to accepted as very real.  Similar to the dream is unreal only from
   the waker’s stand point.

An unreal creation is useful as a
stepping stone to come to the reality, the Thuriyum.  Dwaidam is
acceptable and useful in gaining sadhana sadhusta sambundhi.  Dwaidam in
the form of karma and upsana is required until gaining sadhana sadhusta
sambandhi.  For mandha and madhyama adhikari dwaidam is required and for
uthama adhikari advaidam is required.

17th to 22 verses are diversion to
say that if you don’t accept advaidam and take dvaidam as the ultimate reality,
then you will have many problems.

1. Raga dwesha problem or emotional problem.  If the
   religion is not used as a stepping stone to advaidam, then religion will
   become phonytic.  When a person is in duality, he is in thrupudi
   pramadha, pamanam or premayam:  Cause, effect and instrument. 
   In advaidam a person will at himself as pramadha and use a set of prmanam
   and the truth or the world I see will never be objective, because it
   depends on the instrument and as a result the pramayam will differ from
   instrument to instrument.  Each one will talk about the reality as
   interpreted by his background – intellect, poorva jenma etc.  Therefore,
   for every pramadha his own world is the reality and will not know what the
   reality for someone else.  The truth will be relative – vyavakarika
   sathyam.  Each religion is a threat to other religion.  Each
   religion thinks the other is wrong.

Verse 18

Non duality is indeed the absolute
Reality.  Duality is said to be manifestations only.  For dualitst,
duality exists both temporarily and absolutely.  Hence this teaching is
not in conflict with them. 

Advaidam alone is the absolute
reality; duality is only its apparent manifestation.  One Brahman alone
appears as vyavaharikaly appears as pramadham, pramayam and premanam.  For
a dwaiting, it is not possible.  Dwaidam alone is the absolute reality and
therefore the problems are also absolutely real.  Samsara and moksha are
all dwaidam.  They will say you are jiva and different from god.  In
moksha, you will be serving the lord instead of serving ordinary people in this
life.  Also, there will be gradation and all moksha’s will be allowed at
the same place.  Even in moksha they have duality.  An advaidin will
never criticize even an animal sacrifice; animal is killed for eating all over
anyway.

Verse 19

The birth-less Atma becomes
differentiated through maya only; not in any other manner.  For, if it is
really differentiated, the immortal Atma will undergo mortality. 

Where there is duality, there will
be jealousy.  In this verse he talks about intellectual problems. 
Advaidam Brahman is beyond time and space; infinite principle which can’t
undergo a change (six changes).  Brahman being infinite, does not undergo
any changes; it is logically impossible.  Brahman undergoes a seeming
change and appear as universe just as the mind appears as dream world. 
This changeless Brahman multiplies itself into pluralistic creation only
apparently, seemingly.  If Brahman does undergo a change, then infinite
will become finite, which is logically impossible.

Atma is kariya karana
vilakshanam.  Atma is neither an effect or a cause.  Nothing is born
out of atma neither the jagat or jiva.  Gowdapadha established this by:

1. Yuktyya jiva shrity nishedhaga:  Logical negation
   of jiva shristy (Verses 3 to 9)
2. Yukthya jagat shristy nisedhagaha:  Logical
   negation of jagat shrisy (Verse 10)
3. Shruthya jiva shristy nishedhaha:  Scriptural negation
   of jiva shristy (Verses 11 to 14)
4. Shruthya jagat shrisy nishedhaha:  Scriptural
   negation of jagat shristy. (Verses 15 to 30)

Gowdapadha took many maha vakyam to
establish number 3.  Jivatma and paramtma are two words but there is only
one.  If there is onlhy one, then there is no relationship.  When
there is no relations there can be no cause and effect.  However,
Gowdapadha is conveniently taking only those portions where jivatma and
paramatma are taken as one and not the portions where the jivatma pramatma beda
is talked about.  For example, the two birds imagery in Mundaka
Upanishdads.  When the Upanishads do talk about the beda, they are only
temporarily valid because dwaidam is used as a stepping stone, Therefore we
have to use dwaidam and practice karma yoga.  We have to accept dwaidam
and upasana yoga also. Until we practice karma yoga and upasana yoga and gather
sadhana sadhusta sambandhi, we have to accept dwaidam.  For example, the
skin of banana and fruits is required for ripening of the fruit but you can’t
say I am ungrateful to the skin and eat the skin.  But we remove the skin,
it is not ingratitude.  Similarly, dwaidam is required untill advaidam is
acquired and after advaidam is acquired, dwaidam is discarded as mithya. 
Mithya is not sathyam but temporarily valid and useful.

Verse 15

Creation has been taught in many
ways through the example of clay, gold, spark etc.  It is a method for the
understanding of non duality.  There is no duality anyhow.

There are many statements in
Upanisahd which clearly states Brahman is not a karanam.  In Katho
upanishad, it is stated that Brahman has not produced the world at all; no
plurality born out of Brahman.  If you see plurality, it is
misconception.  But you are quoting only mantras that negate creation, but
there are many mantras where creation is talked about.  Creation is also
used as a teaching method, it has only temporary validdity.  Creation is
not the primary teaching of the Upanishads.  In Taitreya Upanishad, pancha
boodha talked about.  This was also talked about in other upanishad in
various form.  They also give different example.  In Chandokya
Upanishad clay-pot example, gold-ornament and iorn examples are given. 
This indicates from one Brahman many jagats came.  Even though Vedas discuss
shristy, Gowdapadha boldly asserts it is not a fact.  It is only
provisionally valid like scaffolding.  Shruthi itself negates them
later.  Veda can’t avoid shristy topic because it is a stepping stone to
arrive at advaidam.  It is a methodology to teach advaidam.

1. Pot is a product
2. What is the cause of the product?
3. Clay is the cause of the pot – introduction of second
   stage.
4. Can you show me a pot other than clay?
5. There is no substance other than clay – third stage –
   negation of effect or product, pot.
6. Once you negate the pot, the effect, the clay can’t be
   called a cause.  Clay enjoys the status of cause only because of
   pot.  In the fourth stage, you negate the karanam status of the clay
   (you don’t negate the pot, only its status).

Pot vision is replaced by clay vision
which can’t be classified as karnam or kariyam.  The first two stages or
adhyaropa stages and the next two stages are called

In the case of Vedanta, pot should
be replaced by universe.

1. World is a product
2. God or Brahman is the cause
3. There is no world other than Brahman
4. If world, the product is negated, then Brahman can’t
   enjoy the status cause.    To arrive at this conclusion, Upanishads
   introduce the god.

Example:  Divide 17 elephants
in the ration of 1/2, 1/3 and 1/9 by donating one elephant and taking it away
as the final remaining elephant.

Verse 16

There are three types of seeker with
inferior, intermediate and superior vision.  Upasna has been taught for
them out of compassion.

If in the vision of vedas. there is
no creation, there is no creator why do the veda discuss the meditation of
paramatma by jivatma?  This creator and created is also provisionally
accepted until the mind is mature for advaidam.  There are three types of
inferior seekers:

1. Heena, Mandha, the lowest
2. Madhyama, middle
3. Uthkrisha, the superior

These people are not prepared for
advaidam and will not appeal.  Upanishad does not want to force advaidam
on these people.

Verse 17

The dualists are firmly settled on
their own set of conclusions.  They contradict one another.  This
teaching is not in conflict with them.

From this verse to up to 22nd verse
are diversion verses.  Gowdapadha says only when the student co-operates
with the teacher, he will be able to use dwaidam as a stepping stone and arrive
at advaidam.  If the co-operation is not there, then the student will take
dwaidam as the fact and will become a phonetic dwaist and lose sight of
advaidam. This results in loss for the prejudiced student.  Gowdapadha
criticize these students who wants to remain in karma, puja, upasana and ishta
devada and do not want to transcend to advaidam.

Thuriyua padham is advaidam. 
The significant of the word advaidam is that thuriyum is beyond cause and
effect, absolute principle, beyond time and space, not subject to
modification.  Cause and effect are subject to modification. 
Whatever is subject to change is within time.  Whatever is beyond time is
not subject to change and beyond cause and effect.  Nothing originates
from that Advaida Brahman.  Neither jiva is born out of paramatma nor the
jagat, the world is born out of Brahman.

Scriptures clearly discuss paramatma
jivatma aikyam through many maha vakyam.  We accept paramtma as
birth-less.  Maha vakyams reveal that paramtma is identical to
jivatma.  Therefore, jivatma is birthless.  Therefore, jivatma is not
a product born out of paramatma.  Therefore, there is no jivatma shristy.

Taitreya upanishad in pancha kosa
viveka says that the jivatma obtained in anandamaya kosa and paramtma obtained
outside are one and the same.

Verse 12

In madhu brahmana of the
brahadhanranhya upanishad, the supreme Brahman is revealed in paris of
locations just the same space is shown in earch and in the stomach.

In this verse, Gowdapadha is taking
Brahadharanya Upanishad.  Second chapter, fifth section is called manu
brahmanyam.  Each chapter is called adhyayam and each section within the
chapter is called brahmanyam.  In this section, Brahman is defined by the
word “Madhu”.  In this section, the upanishad takes many microcosms
like ear, eyes etc and compares to macrocosm and says both are one and the
same.  Similar to water in individual waves and water in ocean are one and
the same.  Brahman obtained in prithvi level (macro) and the Brahman
obtained in body (micro) are one and the same.  Micro is called adhyatmam
and macro is adhibhudham and both are same. Paris of micro and macro like Eye –
Sun; ear – dhik are taken.  Space inside your stomach and space outside is
one and the same.  Chaithanyam obtained inside oneself and the chaithanyam
obtained outside are one and the same.  Chaithanyam obtaining within
oneself is jivatma and chaithanyam outside is paramatma and they are one and
the same.  Since jivatma and paramta are one and the same, jivatatma also
birth-less like paramatma,  So jivatma is not a kariyam and therefore
paramatma not a karanam.  Therefore, atma is kariya karana vilakshanam
therefore it is advaidam.

Verse 13

The non-difference between the jiva
and atma is praised thropugh the statements of identify and pluarility is
condemned.  Such a teaching which is mentioned above becomes consistent in
the way only.

In scriptures there are also
statements about the difference between jivatma and paramtma.  Gowdapatha
seems to ignore.  In Mundaka Upanishads, jivatma is samsari and bound and
the other is free and unbound.  Vedanta seems to contradict itself. 
There are portions of upanishad, jivatma and paramatma are identical and there
are portions of upanishad jivatma and paramtma are totally different. 
When the scriptures talk about dwaidam, but scriptures also criticize dwaidam
strongly by using expressions like whoever sees difference will go from death
to death and will be a samsari.  Taitreya Upanishad says as long as you
see god is different from you, you will be insecure.  As long as you see
difference from god, you will have fear.  Brahadharnyaha says whoever sees
difference between jivatma and paramatma is ignorance as good as an
animal.  Gowdapadha says whoever sees difference is an unfortunate
person.  So scriptures says that dwaidam should be criticized.  Why
do the scriptures prescribe puja and upasana?  In every puja, we are only
reinforcing dwaidam,  Gowdapadha indirectly says that dwaidam must be
ultimately rejected.  But in the beginning stages it is recommended and
required as a stepping stone.  Puja and upsanas are find as a mean but
they are not an end itself.  The final word of the vedas is advaidam
because dwaidam is criticized and advaidam is glorified by scriptures. 
The one who sees one atma has no grief and no regrets.  Dwaidam is
criticized as a destination or end.  Vedas says don’t remain in dwaidam
all the time.  The final conclusion of vedas is learn to say aham brahma asmi.

Verse 14

The separateness of the jiva and the
atma which is declared in the scriptures before the statements of creations is
only secondary with regard to the future teaching of identify.  It is not
at all proper to attribute primary importance to that separateness.

If Dwaidam or difference is cause of
samsara, why should the scriptures talk about dwaidam at all?  The entire
karma kanda is about jivatma and paramatma beda, difference.  Entire
siskha valli is about jivatma paramtma bedam.  Because dwaidam is useful
as a stepping stone.  Nobody can enter into advaidam directly. 
Dwaidam is incomplete without reaching advaidam.  Advaidam is impossible
without going through dwaidam.  Veda purva praga presesnet dwaidam as
stepping stone.  Vedanta teaches advaidam.  Similar to pole
vaulter.  You should be grateful to the pole, but you should drop the pole
to reach the other side.  But without the pole, you can never reach the
height and the other side.   When you drop the pole depends on the level
of the maturity of the student.  That dwaidam taught before the advaitic
teaching, is only temporarily value.  It is not the ultimate
reality.  It is required as a stepping stone.  It is temporarily
valid from the standpoint of future ultimate teaching of advaidam.  Once
you reach advaidam, dwaidam becomes invalid.  It is not proper to give
dwaidam the ultimate validity.

Class
35

Feature of thuriyum is kariya karana
vilakshanam.  The first two padhas are seen as kariya pada as they are
subject to birth and the third is considered karana padha as it is the cause of
the first two padas.   The teaching adjathi vadhaha is establishing
that nothing is born out of thuryium.  This creation that we experience is
generally classified as jiva and jagat.  Gowdapadha wants to establish
that jiva and jagat are not born out of Thuriyum.   This he teaches
in four stages:

1. Yuktyya jiva shrity nishedhaga:  Logical negation
   of jiva shristy (Vereses 3 to 9)
2. Yukthya jagat shristy nisedhagaha:  Logical
   negation of jagat shrisy (Verse 10)
3. Shruthya jiva shristy nishedhaha:  Scriptural
   negation of jiva shristy (Verses 11 to 14)
4. Shruthya jagat shrisy nishedhaha:  Scriptural
   negation of jagat shrity. (Verses 15 to 30)

To convey the first idea, Gowdapadha
is comparing jiva to pot space.  The same paramatma enclosed in body is
jivatma.  Unenclosed consciousness is paramatma and enclosed consciousness
is jiva.  Similar to total space and pot space.  Pot space seems to
have an apparent origination.  The pot space appears to originate when the
pot is created.  Similarly, when the pot is destroyed, the pot space is
also seemingly destroyed.  The origination and destruction are
apparent.  The arrival, departure, plurality, gradation etc. of pot space
are all apparent.  Because space can never leave or be impure.  Space
itself does not have purity or impurity.  Extending the same principle,
jiva is pure consciousness and the birth, death, arrival, departure, getting
old etc.  are apparent.  All of these belong to body mind complex.

Verse 9

Jiva is similar to the pot space in
the case of death, birth, departure, arrival and existence in various bodies.

Whatever feature of jiva are all not
true.  To understand this, you should compare to pot space.  The
feature of jiva we consider are:

• Birth:  Jiva is never conceived
• Death:  Maranam
• Arrival and Departure from one body to another body.  All pervading consciousness cannot travel from one body to another.   We mistake the travel of mind as departure
• Occupation of different bodies

Jivatma is very much similar to the
pot space.  With regard to pot space these five features are only
apparent; similarly, for jivatma these features are illusion and
delusion.  Jivatma is not born out of paramtma.  Paramatma is not a
karanam and jivatma is not kariyam.  There is only one kariya karana
vilakshanam and that atma is mistaken as jivatma and paramta.  By that mistake
you create a karana kariya sambandha.

Verse 10

All bodies are projected by the maya
of the atma like dream.  There is no reason to establish their realty
whether there is superiority or total equality among them.

Logical negation of jagat shrishti.

In the previous portion we said pot
space is not born at all; birth belongs to pot only and we committed the mistake
of transferring the birth of pot to pot space and conclude pot space is
born.  Jiva atma, the chaithanyam is not born.  Chaithanyam is
eternal and not born.  Body is born and the birth of the body is falsely
transferred to the chainthanyam.  But only body the enclosure is born. 
So, if you accept that the body is born, then you should accept the birth of
the elements – pancha boodham.  That means the world is born, then for
that world paramatma should be karanam.  So paramatma can’t be kariya
karana vilakshanam.  However, even the birth of the body and elements is
not real birth.  The body, pancha boodha etc are born out paramatma maya
sakthi, the power to create unreal world.  The world is born unreally or
apparently.  Brahman created this world with the unique power, Maya. 
This is similar to human’s nidhra sakthi which creates swapnam – dream world. 

Body mind complex is called
sanghatha.  This represents entire inert creation.  During the dream,
the dream world appears real, but upon waking up, it disappears.  Similarly,
the inert world appears real but upon gyanam it becomes unreal.  So Maya
is mithya and the world created by Maya is also mithya.  This Maya is
resting on Atma. Maya and world are mithya and atma is sathyam.  Mithya
does not mean absent, but it means less real.  Just like dream is experienced
but not as real as the world.  Similarly, this world is experienced but
not as real as thuriyum.  Thuiryum is paramarthika sathyam; this universe
is called vyavaharika sathyam and dream world is called parabathika
sathyam.  Dream world is less real than waker’s world; the waker world is
less real from thuriyum standpoint.  Less real world can’t be counted with
more real world.  The dream money can’t be added along with waker’s
money.  Therefore, there is only one atma, or thuriyum.

Tangible experience can’t be real,
in dream there are so many experiences that look real. But upon waking up
they are falsified.  Whether the bodies
are superior or inferior or equal, they are all mithya.  Utility,
tangibility, expedience cannot prove that the world is real.  World is mithya.

Verse 11

The five kosas beginning with
annamaya are mentioned in Tatitreya upanishda.  The supreme atma is
revealed as teh content of them like space.

• First stage:  Gada Akasa
  example
• Second stage:  Swapna example.
• Third stage:  Vedapramanam or
  scriptural evidence to establish jiva shrishy nishedha or negation of jivatma
  creation.

Common misconception paramatma is
the cause and jivatma is the effect.  Because of this misconception
paramatma is taken as karanam.  He quotes maha vakyams to support for the
conclusion.  Maha vakyam means any statement that reveals oneness of
jivatma and paramatma.

• Tatvam asi – Chhandogya Upanishad
• Pragyanam Brahma – Aitareya Upanishad
• Aham Brahma asmi – Brihadaranyaka Upanishad
• Ayam atma Brahma – Mandukya Upanishad

Jivatma is identical to paramatma
and we accept that paramatma is eternal and doesn’t have birth.  Paramatma
is birthless; paramatma is identical to jivamta; therefore, jivatma is
birthless; so jivatma is not a product.  If jivatma is not a product or
kariyam, then paramatma can’t be a cause or karanam.

Taitreya upanishad says very same all-pervading consciosness
obtained in the panca kosa atma.  When it is outside it is called brahman
or paramatma and inside it is called atma or jivatma.  It is only nama
vasthu.  In taitreya upanishad five kosas were enumerated; annamaya,
pranamaya, manonmaya, vigyanamaya and anandamaya.  After enumerating the
pancha kosa, the inner content, consciousness, was revealed as atma.  Then
this atma is revealed as all-pervading consciousness.  Jivatma contained
within the kosas is revealed as the same paramatma outside.  From this we
have to derive, that if jivatma and paramtma are identical, then jivatma is
birthless just like paramata

Karika
# 4: ghaṭādiṣu pralīneṣu ghaṭākāśādayo yathā | 
ākāśe saṃpralīyante tadvajjīvā ihātmani || 4 ||

4. As
on the destruction of the pot, etc., the ether enclosed in the pot,
etc., merges in the Ākāśa (the great expanse of ether), similarly
the Jīvas merge in the Ātman.

Greetings All,

Recapping his teaching of
Karika # 4, Swami Paramarthananda said, Gaudapada wants to explain the word
Advaitam as described for Turiyam in mantra # 7. Turiyam is Karya Karana
Vilakshanam. Here Karyam means effect while Karanam is cause. Karyam is Dvaitam;
Karanam is potential dvaitam; hence Advaitam must be karya karana Vilakshanam.
Gaudapada wants to establish that Turiyam Brahma is not karanam at all. He
wants to show that no creation has come out of Turiyam.

Here Turiyam means Jiva and
Jagat. So, he wants to show each, Jiva and Jagat, both are not created from
Brahman.

The idea that:

Jiva is born from Pramatma;
and Jagat is born out of Paramatma is negated.

Karikas # 3-#9: Shows Jivatma
is not born.

Karika # 10: Shows Jagat is
not born.

Later scriptural texts also
establish the same.

Of the four steps we are in
step # 1.

To convey the idea that
jivatma is not born, idea of pot space is used. Pot space birth is only a
seeming birth. Similarly, Atma is one and same; when it is all pervading it is called
Paramatma; and same Paramatma enclosed in body is re-named Jivatma. So, Jivatma
is seemingly born and when body is gone, Jivatma is seemingly gone. In this
regard five misconceptions were discussed.

1. Origination of
   Jivatma
2.  Disappearance of jivatma.
3. Various Doshahas.
4. Visheshaha:
   individuality of Jivatma indicated through; I am Brahmana, I am Sanyasi etc;
   all indicating individuality.
5. Relationship between Jivatma and paramatma: Reality is that they are not different.
   Jivatma is Paramatma and Paramatma is Jivatma.

All above
five misconceptions can be understood through pot space analogy. Creation,
destruction, pollution, individuality (I am big pot space) and relationship of
pot space to total space, are all, misconceptions.

Karika # 3
was about misconception of origination of Pot space.

Karika # 4
was about misconception about destruction of pot space. Space can’t be
destroyed, cut, wet etc. Even merger of pot space into total space, no such
event ever occurs. We wrongly call it pot space merger. Reality is that when
pot space was destroyed, I withdrew the word pot. Thus, change is not in space,
it is only in my mouth. Similarly for a Gyani, when we withdraw the word
Jivatma, it is not a merger, another misconception. Sunrise and sun set are all
words that are common misconceptions and yet no one questions them.

Karika # 5:

yathaikasmiṅghāṭākāśe
rajodhūmādibhiryute | 
na sarve saṃprayujyante tadvajjīvāḥ sukhādibhiḥ || 5 ||

5. As any portion of Ākāśa enclosed in a pot
being soiled by dust, smoke, etc., all such other portions of Ākāśa enclosed
in other pots are not soiled, so is the happiness, etc., of the Jīvas, i.e.,
the happiness, misery, etc., of one Jīva do not affect other Jīvas.

Pollution is
misconception # 3. Gaudapada talks of misconception # 3, that leads to other
misconceptions.

When a pot
is dirty, people think pot space is polluted; foul smell of pot belongs to air,
space does not have impurity or foul smell; we transfer the impurity from pot
to space and thus commit a mistake.

Another pot
has fragrance. Here people say fragrance belongs to pot space, while I say it
belongs to the pot. Thus I conclude one pot has foul smell while another has
fragrance.  So, I think pot space has
attributes; thus pot space # 1 has bad attribute and so I think it is bad;
while Pot space # 2 has good attribute; so I think it is good. This analogy extends
to Jivatma; thus some jivatmas are considered good with good attributes; some
are Duratmas with bad attributes; then there are also mahatmas. So, we think
there are different types of atmas.

Sankhya
philosophers say that in Advaita all jivatmas are one and same; hence when one
jivatma has sorrow, all jivatmas also experience sorrow. But in reality when we
see one jivatma in sorrow, others may not be sorrowful. Gaudapada says, the
fact that one jivatma is sorrowful itself is a wrong conception; sorrow is an
attribute of anatma (mind) and not atma. Minds pollution is sorrow. This is a
misconception.

In example
of pot space, when one pot space is polluted it does not mean all pot spaces
are polluted.  Pollution belongs to pot
and air but not of space. So, there is only one all pervading space.

Karika # 5
description: When pot space is polluted with dust, smoke all other pot spaces
are not contaminated, why? Not because spaces are many and are different, but
because the one pot space is not really contaminated. In same way even when one
jivatma is polluted with papa, other jivatmas are not polluted. Reality is that
the one and only atma, present in all bodies, is not polluted. Gaudapada says
Jivatma’s is not polluted by happiness as well. Happiness, a temporary
experience happening in our mind, is seen as pollution by Vedanta; as such it
is considered potential sorrow. Gita chapter # 18 says happiness and pleasure
will lead to sorrow, as everything is cyclic. Vedanta sees worldly pleasures as
pollution.

Until
we see atmananda, we are allowed to enjoy dharmic pleasures, although, even
there, it is still a pollution. Sukha, Dukha and Moha are all pollutions of
mind, not of atma, while Atmananda is nirguna chaitanyam. With this the third
misconception that jivatma is associated with impurity is over.

Karika # 6:

rūpakāryasamākhyāśca
bhidyante tatra tatra vai | 
ākāśasya na bhedo’sti tadvajjīveṣunirṇayaḥ || 6 ||

6. Though
form, function and name are different here and there yet this does
not imply any difference in the Ākāśa (which is one). The same is
the conclusion (truth) with regard to the Jīvas.

Fourth
misconception is that pot space has individuality; that there is difference
between room space, kitchen space and headspace. Individuality has three fold
attributes of:

1. Nama
2. Rupa and
3. Karma.

Nama:
such as pot space, headspace, stomach space etc are different namas.

Rupam:
Shape and volume. Room space is small; I need bigger house space; space is
inside room; inside house etc. Vedanta says, there is no “space within room” or
“ space outside room”; all these are wrong expressions. “All rooms are within
one indivisible space.” Even walls are within space. Adjective small, big etc
are misconceptions. Thus, we give individuality through use of adjectives. Thus
we say, this Jivatma is a papi, while another is gyani. All attributes belong to either Sthula, sukshma and Karana shariras
only. No attribute belongs to Jivatma.

Rupa:
Differences in forms are due to function; such as pot space has a function,
room space has another function etc. Namas: are also different indicating pot
space, small space, large space etc.

All
these differences don’t belong to space at all. There is no difference in
space. It does not do anything; does not function at all. Similarly, the one
paramatma is misconceived as different Jivatmas. How to become paramatma? Someone
said one could remove it by scrubbing the atma. Here the only impurity is the
misconception that I am impure. Accept you are, you were and will always be the
one and only paramatma. The fourth misconception is complete.

Karika # 7:

nā”kāśasya
ghaṭākāśo vikārāvayavau yathā | 
naivā”tmanaḥ sadā jīvo vikārāvayavau tathā || 7 ||

7. As the Ghaṭākāśa (i.e., the ether portioned
off by the pot) is neither the (evolved) effect nor part of the Ākāśa
(ether), so is the Jīva (the embodied being) neither the effect
nor part of the Ātman.

The
fifth misconception: here Gaudapada talks of relationship between jivatma and paramatma,
a very important philosophical relationship. All different philosophies such as
Yoga, and Sankhya raise this question but Gaudapada says all philosophies reach
the wrong conclusion. Some say Paramatma is creator and Jivatma is created,
thus there is a karya karana sambandha. Another concept is jivatma is a part of
paramatma, a part and whole relationship, known as Vishishta advaita. Paramatma
is big consciousness while jivatma is small consciousness. Gaudapada says this
also is wrong just like in pot space and total space relationship. One says pot
space is product of total space. Reality is that there is no pot space created;
only a pot is created. So, here karya karana sambandha is the misconception.

A
second group argues that pot space is a part of total space, or so it seems.
What is definition of pot space? Pot space is space inside pot. Vedanta says space is not within pot rather
pot is obtaining within space. In total space many pots are born and many die
as well.

Another
idea is pot space is a part of total space; this true only if space can have
parts and it can be assembled and dis-assembled. Thus, pillar is a part of a
hall and it can be disassembled. In reality we can’t say this of space, as
total space can’t be assembled or disassembled and hence pot space can’t be cut
out of total space. Space is part-less (without parts); this is reality.

Karika
# 7: Pot space is not a product of total space or a part of total space as
well. In the same way, Jivatma is never born; I am never a product or part of
Paramatma.

Swamiji reiterated that these are all
very important Karikas.

Therefore Jivatma is not born out of
pararmatma.

Therefore, paramatma is not karanam of
Jivatma.

Therefore, paramatma is Turiyam karya
karana Vilakshana Advaitam.

Karika # 8:

yathā
bhavati bālānāṃ gaganaṃ malinaṃ malaiḥ | 
tathā bhavatyabuddhānāmātmā’pi malino malaiḥ || 8 ||

8. As the ether appears to the ignorant children to be soiled
by dirt, similarly, the Ātman also is
regarded by the ignorant as soiled.

This karika can also be read
with the karika # 5 where Gaudapada made a compromising statement. There, he
said, even when one space is polluted, all other pot spaces are not polluted.
Here, he seems to agree that pot space can be polluted.

 This, now, he wants to change. He says this
view is from point of view of an ignorant person, an Agyani. Reality is that
pot space is not really polluted. Foul smell belongs to pot, not space.
Similarly the jivatma is seen as polluted by an Agyani. Truth is, pollution
belongs to container and it is transferred to space wrongly.

Similar example is when train
reaches Madras we say Madras has arrived; movement of train has been falsely
been transferred to the place, Madras. This is called superimposition while
Shankaracharya calls it  Adhyabhasha.

All problems that I claim for
myself are the false transfer of problems belonging to object that I am
transferring to subject. Thus while watching a movie the sorrow of hero is
transferred to me. In the same way, only an Agyani, jivatma appears to be
contaminated with kama, krodha, Raga, Dvesha etc. Reality is that all jivatmas
are shudha paramatma alone, Tat Tvam Asi.

Take Away:

1. Reality is that
   they are not different. Jivatma is Paramatma and Paramatma is Jivatma.
2. All attributes
   belong to either Sthula, sukshma and Karana shariras only. No attribute belongs
   to Jivatma.
3. Vedanta says
   space is not within pot rather pot is obtaining within space. In total space
   many pots are born and many die as well.

With Best Wishes

Ram Ramaswamy