9. Brihadaranyaka Upanishad - Mantra 2.4.13 | Swami Sarvapriyananda

O, poor nama dha, poor nami dham, poor nād, poor nād, poor nād, poor dha,

chati, poor nādhāya, poor nāmi vāva shisya, ti, o mshanti, shanti, shanti,

o m, that is infinite and this is infinite. From that infinite, this infinite has a reason.

In this infinite, if its infinite tube is discovered, then infinity alone exists, o m, peace, peace, peace.

Welcome back to this class on the prehadārniek Upanishad. And in this class, we are studying just one section of this great Upanishad.

The dialogue between the sage Yagyavalkya and his wife, my three. The entire message, the entire teaching can be summarized in one word.

In Sanskrit Sarvatma Bhava, which means being the essence or the self of the entire universe of everything, or to put it even more simply, oneness.

The whole universe is one with you. You are one with the entire universe.

A little qualification here, a technical qualification, oneness does not mean in this case a collection. For example, there are all these things in this room.

Suppose you put them all together, there is a bundle of things, all the things in one bundle, the things in this room, a collection, an inventory, a catalog of books.

Not in that sense. The oneness we are talking about here, the oneness of all things, would still exist, even if all things did not exist.

So, it is oneness because it is such a dawn on the existence consciousness bliss, appearing as this entire universe.

If the appearance were to disappear, still the reality would remain. And that reality you are. In fact, that is the discussion today, we will see.

So, that reality you are. You are that one reality appearing as everything, which is, when you look at everything, you are the one reality at the heart of everything, everything.

Yagya Valkyar teaches this by showing that the self is everything. How does he show that? He says this entire universe arises from the atman, exists in the atman, and disappears back into the atman.

And the examples he used, we have seen those examples, wonderful metaphors he has used, the example of the fuel burning and smoke and various colors of sparks and kinds of smoke emanating from that fuel.

Similarly, the entire universe has arisen from the one fire called Brahman or atman.

And we have also seen the examples of the music examples of the sound of the conge of the drum, Dundubhi, the drum, the conge and the Vena.

And how they all those melodies and rhythms, they all exist in the sound of the instrument itself, that is the reality, which you experience as different rhythms or melodies.

Similarly, the universe is like music, but the sound itself is Brahman, from which in which you experience the varieties of music, which is the universe.

And the final dissolution of the universe in each cosmic cycle, it is like a lump of salt thrown into the ocean, then it becomes one with the ocean, becomes indistinguishable from the rest of the ocean.

In this way, that from which the universe arises, that in which the universe exists, into that which the universe disappears.

So, what does this kind of argument, what does this kind of thinking prove?

Well, the material cause, like the clay of all the pottery or the gold of all the ornaments, the material cause is that from which the universe arises, in which that from which the effects arise, in which the effects exist and into which the effects dissolve finally.

What he is arguing here is, the atman is the material cause of this universe, it in that this universe arises, it exists and it disappears.

Therefore, wherever you experience a universe of people, things, objects, activities, it is all the self, it is the atman.

Now, in the last section, which we saw, the mantra number 12, he said something very interesting, he argued well, he said to his wife something very interesting.

He said, when the enlightened one finally dies, the body dies and that one will not die, the enlightened one is atman, it is immortal.

But the body dies, there is no further consciousness, there is no further consciousness.

And that immediately creates confusion, my tray is startled.

What are you saying? Till now you are saying that I am the self, the self is the essence of everything, the universe is one with you and I am immortal and the self is consciousness.

Now, you are saying the self, which is supposed to be consciousness, you have said it already.

Now, you are saying this immortal self, which is consciousness and you are saying after the death of the physical body, the enlightened one, there is no further consciousness, does not have any further consciousness.

Which is it? Is there consciousness or not?

So, now the answer comes from Jaggivaly. We of course know the answer that he is talking about the reflected consciousness, the particularized consciousness, the individualized consciousness, which exists, which functions as long as the body mind are functioning and which disappears when the body mind disappears.

In fact, when the body mind stop functioning in deep sleep, then also this particularized individualized reflected consciousness also disappears every night, it stops.

So, what to speak of the final liberation when the enlightened one remains as Brahman and does not take up any further body mind?

The body is weak, all of us we keep changing bodies as the body is die, but we retain the mind, which evolves over life times.

But after enlightenment the mind also is dropped, so you remain as pure consciousness.

It is like the Shankaracharya himself will explain, like the moon reflected in the water.

When you remove the water, then the reflected moon will disappear.

But the original moon is always there. It doesn't mean the original moon or the sun which is reflected in the water will disappear.

It's always there. Just that the reflection reflected is not there, reflection will not be there.

Mirror and the reflected face. I see my face in the mirror.

The moment I'm not in front of a mirror, I can't see the reflection. Without a mirror reflection is not possible.

It doesn't mean that I've become faceless. My face is there. Nobody doubts that.

Similarly, pure consciousness shining in and through individual minds is what is called the individual consciousness, the Giva.

Yeah, this is another way of saying that after full enlightenment, after the death of the body, the Giva is not there.

Enlightened one remains as Brahman and the Giva nature disappears forever.

That is basically that is Moksha. That's the Vedantic idea of Moksha. It's not so startling, but when it is put in this way, it seems very startling.

There is no further consciousness after death. Reflected consciousness is not there.

Now let us see Yagya Valkyya's explanation. Shankaracharya also writes a wonderful commentary which we will see here.

Ramaitra is confused and she says, Tahu, this is Thirteenth Mantra.

Saho Vacha, Maitre, Atreva, Maam, Bhagavan, Amumu, Hatta, Napretya, Sangastiti.

Saho Vacha, Nava, Arre, Aham, Moham, Bravimi, Alangva, Arre, Idam, Vigyanaya.

Maitre is said, just here you have thrown me into confusion, sir.

By saying that after attaining oneness, the self has no more consciousness.

Yagya Valkyya said, certainly I have not said anything confusing my dear.

This is quite sufficient for knowledge, oh my three. What he is saying here is that I have actually not said anything confusing.

And what I have said is enough for enlightenment.

This recalls to my mind Vivekananda. He said in the west, I have taught only the Upanishads.

For therein lies enough for the salvation of humanity.

Whatever teaching is there is enough for liberation of mankind.

Exactly, it is almost echoing Yagya Valkyya. Yagya Valkyya is saying, what I have taught?

What I have taught you is enough for enlightenment or liberation.

Now, let us look at what has he taught and what was Maitre's question and what is his answer.

We will read a few lines from Shankaracharya's very beautiful commentary on this.

On the 13th Mantra, Shankaracharya writes,

So, he says, once, pray after the death of the physical body, enlightened one, after the death of the physical body,

there is no particular consciousness or individual consciousness anymore.

For the one, Karya Karana Sangha Te Bhio Vemukta, one who is freed from this stage or prison of not only the body,

but also the subtle body, not only the physical body, also the subtle body.

Both body-mind are gone. Vemukta is free.

Now, he remains as limitless existence consciousness place.

So, there is no particular sense of particular existence.

I am this guy. No.

If he ever marry Maitre, Bravi, Me, Nasi, Visayasa, Sangha, Te.

So, this is what I have said, O Maitre, this is what I have said.

There is no particular individualized consciousness or experience.

And he gives examples. What do you mean by individualized or personal consciousness?

What is with that goes away?

Ahama, so, I am this person. Amushchaputra, I am the son of so and so.

Mamidam, Shaitaram, Dhanam, these fields are mine.

This house or wealth is mine.

Sukhi, Dukhi, Devam.

I am happy or I am miserable.

This kind of identification, Lakshana, these are not there.

Why not? What happened that all these are lost?

Avidya, Krita, Toata, Syaaha, because they are all products of ignorance.

Avidya, Asya, Brahma, Avidya, Nira, Nira, One, Vayato, Nashi, Toata, Kuto, Visayasa, Sangha, Sangha.

Because ignorance has been destroyed with its effects.

Ignorance and its effects have been destroyed by enlightenment,

by the knowledge of Brahma.

I am Brahma, and I am existence and consciousness, please.

That I have realized.

Ignorance has been destroyed.

And so the effects of ignorance.

I am this person.

I am happy or I am miserable.

I own these are my properties.

These are my degrees.

This is my position in life.

This is my relation to all these people.

All those things are gone forever.

Because they were products of Avidya ignorance.

How are their products of ignorance?

Because by ignorance, I think I am this one only, this body and mind.

And therefore, whatever is related to this body and mind,

relatives, possessions, my past history,

all of that are considered to be mine or my identity, my story.

That is falsified now.

For whom?

He says, Brahma, Avidya, for the Enlightened one.

Brahma literally means the one who has known or realized Brahma.

Who is the one who has known or realized Brahma?

And how would you characterize this person?

Very precise identification.

Brahma, Avidya, of the one who is enlightened and the knower of Brahmins.

Chaitanya, Sobhava, Avastita, here.

He is the one who is centered in one's nature as pure consciousness.

That is the characteristic of the Enlightened one.

The one who identifies as consciousness.

So nowadays, we have all this.

I identify as so and so.

This is my identification, my gender, my...

So identification, all kinds of identification.

Vedanta is also like that.

That is one type of woke identification with this gender identity or that.

Vedanta is not exactly woke.

It is a woke.

So I wake on the said, awake.

We awake to your real nature.

And what is that identity?

You identify as pure consciousness.

Nobody denies that we are conscious.

We all agree we are conscious.

But what we think of ourselves is and this bundle.

Like Shankar, Raghavalka said, like this lump of salt.

And this bundle here.

This body, living body, senses, mind with ego and intellect and memory.

This is exactly who I am.

And this kind of thinking, feeling, willing.

This is what I mean by individualized consciousness.

And he says, this is lost when you become enlightened.

When you, after the death of the body mind.

Death of the body and the dissolution of the mind into prakriti,

which happens to the enlightened one only.

Then he says,

Even when the body is there, when the body is there, mind is there.

This particularized consciousness, a particularized awareness,

is not there for the enlightened one.

What to speak of that state where the body mind disappears?

Now this has to be handled carefully.

There are two meanings here.

One meaning is that even when we are, when the enlightened one is alive in the sense of the body is alive.

Enlightened one is still living in this body.

What would such a one be called?

Given Mukta, living and free.

After the death of the body, that enlightened one will now be called Videha Mukta,

bodyless liberation.

But liberated in the body.

Now liberated in the body.

At this, the one meaning would be, even while liberated in the body.

Even then, in a deep sense that one does not have a particularized consciousness

because that one does not identify with that particularized consciousness.

That one knows that we are subject and object are still appearing.

But they are dream like in me.

I am that one consciousness which is appearing like this, appearing as this objective world

and this subjective person.

But I am the one consciousness.

Swami Vivekananda is a song of Sannyasana.

He has a very beautiful,

I have quoted it often, but I want to be precise while quoting it.

So in the Sannyasana, he says, there is but one, the free, the knower, self,

without a name, without a form or stain, in him is Maya dreaming all this dream.

Now the next one is important.

The witness, he appears as nature's soul in our language, subject, object.

That one consciousness, the true self, appears as the apparent self

and the objective world, as the subject and the objective world, as the Jeeva and Jagat.

Who appears?

Atma or Brahmana appears.

Now for the enlightened one,

his consciousness, his understanding, his identification has shifted from the Jeeva

to the underlying Atman.

As Shankaracharya says, Brahma Vidha, Chaitanya, Sovha, Vastasya,

the one who is centered in one's nature as pure consciousness

or as Vivekananda calls it the witness.

So from there, he knows that I am appearing as this guy and this guy's world,

but I am neither this guy nor that world.

So in one sense, from the enlightened person's perspective,

even while living in the body, even when body is there, mind is there,

they are appearing, he does not identify with any of them.

So that's one meaning when Shankaracharya says that,

Charira, our status, even while being in the body,

the enlightened one does not identify with the subject, object identification,

the Jeeva, Jagat identification of it.

I have given so many examples.

That's why sometimes the behavior this enlightened one is startling.

So they sometimes can behave like us and sometimes not like us.

Sometimes they behave like us as if they are the body mind,

just like us for interaction with us or sometimes they do not.

Where Sri Ramakrishna would refer to the body as this,

or I have told you that amusing story about somebody wrote an article criticizing Ramana Maharshi

and sent it to Ramana Maharshi.

Ramana Maharshi corrected it, the grammar and spelling and sent it back to him.

Somebody said he is criticizing you and Ramana Maharshi said no.

He is criticizing some fellow called Ramana.

So the personality of Ramana Maharshi, he does not identify with that,

he is aware of it, he is not blind to it, he is aware of it.

So that's one meaning, the sentence here can be interpreted in two ways.

Even while the body is there, the particularized awareness or particularized identification

is not there for the enlightened one or another meaning could be for everybody.

Even when the body mind is there, sometimes even the particularized awareness goes away,

like deep sleep for all of us.

When we fall asleep, there is no particular awareness of I am this guy sleeping.

When we are awake, there is this particularized awareness.

I am this person in this body mind and this is my life.

When we are dreaming, then also there is a particularized awareness of our particular character in the dream.

But in deep sleep we have only a generalized blankness.

There is no particular awareness that I am this person in deep sleep.

So the identification as a person goes away even when we are in the body once in a while.

What to speak of a body less state?

When there is no body and no mind, how can there be a particularized awareness or a particularized consciousness that one Jeeva?

These are the two possible interpretations of this comment by Shankaracharya.

Then enlightened one, while remaining the body as the Jeevan Mukta,

even then does not identify with the individualized Jeevan nature.

What to speak of after the death of the body and the resolution of the mind?

And even ordinary persons, we lose our particularized identity as Jeeva in deep sleep for example.

Then he says, Shankaracharya says,

And thus did Jeeva reveal the highest truth.

Shankaracharya uses the language, Paramatthadarshanam, the ultimate truth, the highest philosophy.

He revealed it to Maitreya, Bhariya, his wife.

Jagyavalkya spoke this highest truth to his wife, Maitreya.

But then Maitreya comes back with a question.

I am confused.

On this point, I am delighted.

Your words are contradictory.

Now Shankaracharya makes it clear.

What is the contradiction?

What is the problem?

What is Maitreya saying?

Katam teena, Virudhadarma vattva muktam,

itch chate, purvam, vigyaanagana, eva iti prati gaya,

punar na prateya sangyastiti,

what Maitreya is saying is, how can, how is it possible that the same thing you are talking about,

the same thing having two contradictory natures?

You are saying the self, I, the self.

You said first, I am pure consciousness.

I am not the body, not the mind, I am pure consciousness.

He says, the vigyaanagana, purvam, earlier you have instructed me,

that I am pure consciousness.

I am not really this body.

I am not really this mind.

I am not really this person, Maitreya.

And this pure consciousness appearing through this body, mind and acting as Maitreya right now.

But I am my real nature is pure consciousness,

which is the reality of the entire universe.

And you have told me this.

This is the whole teaching till now.

And suddenly you say, punar na prateya sangyastiti,

suddenly you say, after the death of this Maitreya body,

there will be no further consciousness.

How can the same thing, which is the same thing, the atma, the self?

I, how can I be pure consciousness?

And suddenly, after the death of the body, not be pure consciousness anymore?

Will there be consciousness or not?

So this is the anxiety we might have when we hear teachings like this,

because it seems so extraordinary.

Right now, we are conscious, we understand.

But if the body is not there, if the mind is not there,

will we at all be conscious?

Will there be any experience at all?

Or is it like being nothing?

Is it like being deep sleep or in general anesthesia?

Is enlightenment like that?

We have this anxiety.

Srirama Krishna says, by diving into the ocean of immortality,

does one, the ocean of consciousness, he says,

does one become unconscious?

So Srirama Krishna assures us, that is not the case.

You are diving into the ocean of consciousness.

The lump of salt has been thrown into the ocean of consciousness.

Will you become unconscious?

No, of course not.

You become pure consciousness.

But still, there is a mystery here.

Why are they cautioning as they will be no further consciousness there?

So such debates come up.

What exactly is it like to be fully enlightened?

And especially when the body will die,

then what will happen to the enlightened one?

When the mind will also dissolve.

Without body mind, what is it like to be enlightened?

I remember a similar debate came up when we were studying Buddhism,

the Harvard Divinity School, one topic arose.

The topic was, it is a debate among the Buddhists.

The state of the Buddha.

The Buddha is supposed to be omniscient,

that is, knowing everything.

But also, in Buddhism, all particular knowledge is false.

Whatever we know in this world, or we can know in this world,

it is all false.

It is all a product of ignorance of Maya.

They don't use the word Maya, but it is a product of ignorance.

Now, the Buddha, being all knowing, he cannot know false things.

That is not being a Buddha.

So what will the Buddha know?

So the question becomes the enlightened one.

Does the enlightened one know everything in the sense of being like an encyclopedia,

like the internet or like an AI, like chat GPT?

So the enlightened one knows everything in that sense, all knowledge.

Or the enlightened one knows nothing.

Is that being the Buddha?

Because all this knowledge is false anyway.

So the enlightened one should not know all this.

So the enlightened one knows nothing.

It is something like no consciousness after the death of the physical body of the enlightened one.

In the Buddhist debate, it was, does the Buddha know everything or nothing?

The professor said, he called it brainstem Buddha.

Buddha is reduced to the brainstem, like deep coma, brain dead Buddha.

Now, that is not a very alluring, very exciting prospect for enlightenment,

not a good advertisement for enlightened.

Who wants to be like that?

So that is the question.

That is what my three is anxious about.

She is asking, after the death of this body, what will happen?

What will happen to me if I am enlightened?

What will happen to me when I am not enlightened is understood.

I will go on to further lives.

I will be prepared by my past karma.

I will be born again.

I will go from experience to experience.

But when I am set free from body mind, then what happens?

Purva, Vigya, Naganya, Yatipatya, Yaya, having promised, having put this proposition

that I am going to demonstrate your pure consciousness.

Now, finally, you are concluding this, the teaching by saying, there is no further consciousness.

Katang, Vigya, Naganya, Yaya.

Katang, Vana, Preitya, Sangya, Sthiti.

If there is no consciousness, then how am I pure consciousness?

So, then she gives an example.

I mean, Shankaracharya gives an example.

She says that the same fire, you can't say it is hot and cold.

Fire is hot, we know that.

And you can't say it's cold.

And the same thing, you can't say it's hot and cold at the same time.

It makes no sense.

Something may be cold, something may be hot.

But it can't be at the same time.

It's contradictory.

Now, therefore, I am confused on this point.

Murasmi, Akhtar, not Shankaracharya.

Yadgevalke explains.

And Shankaracharya elucidates what Yadgevalke has said.

Saho Vacharya, Yadgevalke.

So, Yadgevalke said,

My tree, what I have said is not contradictory.

So, that is, our immediate reaction will be,

how, how is it not contradictory?

You have literally said that pure consciousness

and then you are seeing there is no consciousness after death.

But for someone as intelligent as my tree,

this is enough that there is no contradiction in what I have said.

And what I have said is enough for enlightenment.

Luckily, Shankaracharya explains it to us.

What did Yadgevalke mean?

No, no.

Kartham, Virudda Dharmattvama Vachava Chaha,

Biggyana Ghanam, Sangya Bhavam Chaha.

But then, why did you speak of contradictory attributes of the self?

It's pure consciousness.

Or there is no consciousness.

And there is no consciousness after death.

How do you explain that contradiction?

You are saying there is no contradiction.

But then, it appears to be a contradiction.

Then Shankaracharya explains further,

what Yadgevalke meant.

No, Maya, Idam, Akasmin, Dharmini, Abhihitam,

here is the thing.

There is no contradiction,

because I have not asserted this of the same entity.

I have said two things, contradictory things,

but they are meant for two different entities,

not for the same thing.

It is your error that you think I am saying the same thing,

the pure consciousness itself is pure consciousness.

And at the same time, it has no consciousness.

I did not say that.

You assumed it.

Then what did you say?

What is it that you said?

Shankaracharya explains.

Vishya has been said by me.

What I said is this.

He says, this is what has been said by me,

Maya, to Idam Upam,

that which was presented by ignorance,

Avidya Pratyupas Thaapitaha.

What was presented?

This lump, this lump of salt,

this crystal, this little lump of salt,

this bundle of body-mind.

Karya Karana Sambandya Akmanakili Abhava,

the self identified with this complex of body-mind.

This was presented by ignorance.

Ignorance of its real nature is pure consciousness.

Not being aware of yourself has pure consciousness.

You think of this complex body-mind complex called

my tree as yourself.

This is what?

Tasmin Avidya Naashite.

Tasmin Vidya Naashite.

So, when that ignorance,

that connection with this body-mind,

born of ignorance,

has been destroyed by enlightenment.

Vidya, Brahma Vidya,

that I am pure consciousness.

Then, what happens?

Tan Nimitta Ya Bishayatya Sangya.

The specific identification,

specific awareness,

I am this body,

I am this mind,

I am my tree.

Sharirari Sambandini,

connected to the body-mind.

Onyatodarsana Lakshana,

which is characterized by

otherness,

subject objectness.

I am this person,

and this is my word.

That one.

Sakaarya Kaarana Sanghaatopadho Prabhilaapite.

When the body-mind disappears

at the point of death,

the physical body is gone,

the mind is dissolved

in back into nature.

That identification,

that kind of awareness ceases.

Nashyapi.

Hitu Abhavad.

Because its cause is gone.

Body-mind with generated

that kind of awareness is gone.

And then he says,

he gives examples.

Shankaracharya gives examples.

Udhakar, Diyadhar,

and Nashad,

Iwa,

Chandrari,

Pratybhimba,

Tanjmitascha,

Prakashadi,

Napunaha,

Paramatta,

Chandrari,

Tiosvarupa,

Nashavad,

Asamsari,

Brahma,

Asvarupa,

Siyavigya,

Nashaham.

This is just as the moon

of the sun reflected in the

lake,

that reflected sun or moon

will disappear

when the lake disappears.

Suppose the water is

drained from the lake.

Then there will be no

reflected sun,

or no reflected moon.

But that does not mean

the real sun,

or the real moon disappears.

The real sun or the real moon

are there.

Exactly like that,

when the G-1 nature

disappears

and the death

of the body

and the disappearance

of the mind

of the enlightened one.

Then what will happen?

Asamsari,

Brahma,

Tiosvarupa,

Siyavigya,

Nashaham.

He says that

the Brahma,

which is Asamsari,

which was never born,

never died,

is never in bondage,

and therefore,

never liberated.

Always present,

Asamsari, Brahma,

which is Vigya,

Nagana,

pure consciousness.

So rest assured,

you will remain as pure consciousness.

That will never be destroyed.

That Vigya,

Nagana,

it took them.

That is what I meant by

pure consciousness.

That's there now

and that will continue

to be there.

The pure,

the sun or the moon

is there now.

And also,

you have an addition,

a reflected moon

or a reflected sun

in the lake.

But once the lake is dried up,

there will be no reflected sun

or moon.

But the real sun will

continue to exist,

as ever.

And you are that real sun,

or the real moon.

You are not the reflection.

Sir,

Atma,

Sarvastya Jagata,

Paramatta,

Bhutana,

Narvina,

and that pure consciousness,

is the Atma,

the self,

of the entire universe.

Even,

and then he says,

even when the universe disappears,

Bhutanata,

even when the universe disappears,

when all beings

disappear,

that self does not disappear.

So,

which I said in the beginning,

it is the oneness of all existence,

but not one in the sense of a collection,

like a bundle of things.

All the universe may disappear,

but that oneness

may not disappear.

It will remain as this pure consciousness.

And you remain as that.

And you remain as that.

Vinayashi,

Toavidya,

Krita,

Kiliya,

Bhava,

What is then

destructible?

Shankaracharya says,

What is destructible?

Is that bundle?

Is that lump of salt?

It is lump nature.

Salt also is not destructible.

Salt becomes one with the ocean.

But the lump nature,

the crystal nature,

this individualized little

whirlpool of body mind,

which I think I am,

that will dissolve.

You remain as the ocean.

It is the salt doll.

Sir Ramakrishna says,

the salt doll went into the ocean,

to measure the ocean.

Now, it becomes immediately dissolves into the ocean.

Who is there to report from the ocean?

Because there is no individual salt doll left anymore.

That is another way of saying,

what Yagyeval Kis trying to make out.

But it is not that the salt doll is gone.

Rather, the salt doll now exists as one with the entire ocean.

The individuality is gone.

We might say that,

all right.

Thank you for the reassurance.

But I would still like to continue as a person.

I want to be liberated.

But also, I want to be liberated.

I want to be this guy who is liberated.

I want to retain my individual nature.

I am in love with this personality.

First of all, this personality is also a continuous flow.

It is not static.

Which personality will ask?

The baby personality,

the young child's personality,

the young man's personality,

the old person's personality,

which personality are you talking about?

This life, next last life,

10 lives ago,

which personality are you talking about?

Anyway,

what we want to remain as an individual to enjoy?

I want to enjoy this as an individual,

not as some infinite ocean or something.

This is what Saddam Krishna said.

It is possible.

Saddam Krishna said,

you want to become sugar or taste sugar.

If you want to become sugar,

this is becoming sugar.

What Yagyeval Kis talking about is the ultimate.

It is, you are sugar itself.

But if you want to taste sugar,

this is also possible.

Then,

then,

and Iota of individuality is retained.

And the Enlightened One remains as,

in one of the bhavas,

as shanta,

in the peaceful serene attitude,

or as,

in a devotional attitude,

dasya bhava,

sakya bhava,

vaksalya bhava,

madhura bhava,

as a devotional devotee of the Lord.

One knows that I am one with the Lord,

but still,

for me,

the Lord is everything.

I want to retain my individuality and,

love God.

Hanuman says,

Hanuman is fully enlightened.

He says,

Srinath,

Jana-kinaath,

Abheda Paramatmani,

says, I know that,

Rama,

Jana-kinaath,

and Srinath,

Vishnu,

Narayana,

Saguna Brahman,

and the Abatara.

They are one.

Basically, saying,

there is one limitless consciousness.

Abheda Paramatmani.

In the ultimate consciousness,

they are one reality.

And I am that too.

And I am that too.

Tomeva,

or Rama-chandra,

I am,

you know that.

But,

you can sense that,

but is coming.

Hanuman says,

but,

Tathapi,

mamasar,

but,

even so,

mamasar was,

for me,

everything,

everything is,

Sri Rama,

Kamalolo,

the lotus-eyed Rama

is everything for me.

So, I will remain as,

Hanuman,

as this lover of God.

One might want to remain,

the taste of sugar,

and taste sugar.

Both are fine.

Both are grand and wonderful.

But, here it is clearly,

becoming sugar.

That's what Yagyevalke is telling us.

And he gives a number of quotations,

Shankaracharya.

I am,

to Paramatthika,

this is the ultimate truth.

Avina, Shiva,

or Ayamatma,

your very nature,

is indestructible.

It won't disappear.

Don't worry.

So,

my dear,

this is enough for liberation.

Iam,

Mahat,

Bhutan,

Manantaram,

Yatbiak,

whatever has been taught earlier

as this vast infinite being,

that is enough for enlightenment.

And he quotes,

later on it will come

to the very famous line,

which he himself will teach.

Now he will go to

Vigyata,

Vipari Lopo,

Vidyate,

Avina,

Shittwa,

the consciousness of the knower

is never lost,

because it's indestructible.

So, it remains

as this limitless consciousness

or Brahman.

The same thing,

it comes up in different ways,

you see,

in the

tight-tiered

the same issue.

At one point,

suddenly you feel,

am I being

annihilated?

Is he saying that I am

nothing at all?

Or there is nothing

will be there after death?

That's why this distinction,

sometimes,

it's a matter of language.

You will see sometimes,

Swami Vivekananda

in his Gane Yoga,

multiple lectures,

he prefers to use

consciousness

for our present consciousness

and super-consciousness

for Atma,

Turya,

Brahman,

sometimes he uses

about super-consciousness.

So, he would say,

after,

he says in one place,

it is not even consciousness.

A death consciousness goes away,

exactly what you are given,

you see.

But what he means is,

the Turya remains,

the pure consciousness remains,

Atma no Brahman remains,

and you are that.

In the

tight-tiered open issue,

the teacher says,

you have to realize

that the self is

Brahman,

is the ultimate reality.

How do you

realize that?

Well, the Panchakoshabhichara

has started,

and enquired into

the five layers of

the human personality.

The teacher asked the student,

so what do you think

of yourself?

Point out yourself.

What do you think

you exactly are?

What is your present

understanding of yourself?

And like most of us,

we will say,

well, I am this.

The body.

And the student says,

yes, let us begin with that.

I am this body.

And then, you know,

Vedantic teaching will be there.

But you see,

the body is the name of a continuous changing.

It is a flow.

It is continuously modified

from babyhood,

to childhood,

to teenage,

to youth,

to middle age.

But you are the same person,

you know,

not only in our memory,

not only in our

intuition that I am the same self.

But by law,

by common sense,

you are all regarded

at the same person,

regardless of the tremendously changing body.

Your college degrees,

and school degrees,

the certificates will say,

you are that,

the one who was in the school,

in the kindergarten,

in the college,

in your job,

everywhere.

It says,

the one who was born,

the birth certificate,

your school certificates,

and your college degrees,

and whatever,

marriage,

jobs,

everything.

It says,

you are the same person.

So, by law,

you are the same person.

By our own intuitive feeling,

we are the same person.

By memory,

we are the same person.

And yet,

the body is continuously changing.

You can't say,

that the changing

and the unchanging

are literally the same.

So, you can't be the body.

Not only that,

Vedanta will tell us,

that the body is a

conglomeration of objects.

It's a thing.

But you are not the thing.

You are a subject.

So,

just as you are not

any other thing in the world,

you can't be this thing also.

It's an object.

You are the subject.

You are the knower.

The experiencer.

The body is the known.

The experienced.

The two cannot be the same.

Further,

you are also conscious of the body.

The body is not conscious of itself.

The body is not conscious of anything else.

The body is not conscious of you.

But you are conscious of the body.

You are conscious of everything else.

You are conscious of yourself.

You are conscious.

The body is not conscious.

So in these ways Vedanta argues to show you that you are not the body, then Vedanta says,

so what are you? And we think further and we say, well, I am not this physical body but I am

proud, I am life, I am a living body, I am a living person, let's go with that. And Vedanta

shows you again that even life is a thing, it's a process, vitality is a process, our breath for

example, that's also a thing. And it waxes and wanes, there's sometimes health, sometimes sickness,

sometimes energy, sometimes weakness, sometimes hunger and thirst is like the tides in the ocean,

it waxes and wanes, the tides which flow through the body as vitality, life prana.

And you are just still the same, you're the one who was sick, you're the one who became healthy,

you're the one who was hungry, after eating, you're the one who was satiated,

therefore how can you be the ever changing prana but you are never changing, you can't be.

Also, the prana is also a thing and you are the experiencer of the prana, prana is dhrishya,

you are the dhrashta, an object cannot be the same as the subject. And further, you are conscious

of the breath, the breath and all living processes, life processes in this body, they are not conscious

of you, they are not conscious of themselves, they are not conscious of anything else. Conscious

and not conscious cannot be the same thing, ever changing and never changing cannot be the same

the knower and the knower cannot be the same thing, therefore you, the never changing knower

and conscious entity, you must be different from the ever changing the object, the non-conscious

entity called the prana. Then what are you? Will we look inquired further and we find,

well, I'm not exactly the the body of the prana but I am the mind and this person,

I am these thoughts, emotions, memories, desires, understanding, knowledge and the same argument

can be given, changing and unchanging, mind is ever changing, you are never changing, mind

know and knower, mind is something, it's an object known, you are the subject and then conscious

and not conscious, very startling, with answer will say even mind is not conscious, mind is an

object presented to consciousness. The thoughts in the mind do not know themselves, the thoughts in

the mind do not know other thoughts, the thoughts in the mind do not know anything else also,

you are the one who knows everything and you know the thoughts and you know yourself,

so you cannot be the mind also and the same argument is applied to the intellect,

Sanskrit words, the Ananda Maya, Prana Maya, Manoha Maya, Vigyan Maya, none of those layers,

subtler and subtler inward and inward, none of them I am, then we dismiss everything,

go into the seed form, something like our deep sleep state, we can also do a

a thought experiment that if I did not see anything here, smell, taste, touch anything,

I had no sensation of the body completely, unmovings or had you know full sensory deprivation.

So, and then I did not, my feelings are neutral, I don't think of anything, I don't remember

anything, all of that is dismissed, complete blank. So, that blank also is an object,

it also comes and goes, it is a bit like our deep sleep, so I am not that also, that is called

the Ananda Maya, then what am I, what are you then, Vigyantha will ask as the student.

So, at this point, when everything that we thought we were has been dismissed,

naty naty, then a certain anxiety comes, and doubt comes, and the

Upanishad is not helpful at all, we are waiting for the Upanishad to tell us,

till now it has been suggesting, it has been very good at suggesting, are you the body,

are you the prana, are you the mind and are you the intellect, are you the causal state,

the Ananda Maya, it is full of bright ideals, but right now when we are all high and dry,

when we have no more answers, Upanishad also abandons us, then what am I, Upanishad keeps quite.

So, I do not exist, I am nothing, see it is very much similar to what Maitreya faced,

that student asks the teacher, is that Brahma Yatichade, then I do not exist,

is there nothing, when I dismiss the wrong identification, then there is no right identification,

is it all zero, and then of course, we are told that we are the consciousness to which all the

five body, mind, complex, deep, Ananda Maya, Prana Maya, Manoma Maya, Vidyan Maya, Ananda Maya,

they appear and disappear, to that one consciousness, that which we are, the pure subject.

So, that is what is done, but at that point, you see, if you look at the Taitiri Upanishad,

where all this is coming from, you will find at one point exactly like Maitreya asking,

Asad Brahma Yatichade, then there is nothing,

similar situation, which came up with Maitreya.

Another similar situation is, Siddhama Krishna, I was noticing, this book,

the collected sayings of Siddhama Krishna, teachings of Siddhama Krishna, collected Chosen

and collected by Swami Brahmaan, and the number one, selection, and number one in Bengali,

I will just read out the Bengali and translate, and notice, exactly similar situation will come up,

where suddenly you feel that you are in business, nothing, no body, mind, consciousness, nothing.

Siddhama Krishna says, I will read out the Bengali and translate, Manu Shabna Kachinte Parle,

Bhagawan Kachinte Parle, when the human realizes what he is, he realizes God.

When you recognize, or you understand what you are, you understand or recognize God.

This is Mahavakya, that's what I must say, you want that.

Then, how will you recognize yourself? How will you know yourself? How will you, how will we

understand what we are? Ami K, Bhalorub, Bichar, Kodale, Dekte Parle, you must, you must inquire

thoroughly into who am I. What will you find? Ami Bole, Konujini Shni, you will find there's

nothing corresponding to I. You won't find it. If you look for who am I, you won't find any

answer. Heart, power, octomang, shwittadi, airkontami, the hand, feet, flesh, blood, which one of

this is I. And you can extend it, the in-breath or the out-breath, the thoughts and memories, the

sense of ego and knowledge, which one desires, which one am I? Just like peeling an onion,

you will go through a layer and layer of the onion without finding anything as an essence or a

core. Shairub, Bichar, Kodale, Ami Bole, Kichwi, Pine, in that way, when you inquire into who am I,

you will not find anything. You will find layer after layer, the physical, the vital, the mental,

the intellectual, the causal, Anamaya, Pranamaya, Manomaya, Vigyanamaya, Anandamaya,

like layers of an onion, and you will never find yourself. And if you stop here,

the same anxiety which gripped my three, and you grip us. So, I don't exist. So, there is nothing.

Then he says, next, Sheshe Jathaketh, Tyatma, Chaitanya, this is what remains at the end,

after all elimination, after all nati, nati, not this, not this, that is the self-consciousness.

Sharan Vishnu explicitly says it, what remains after this process of elimination,

what remains after this process of enquiry, is the real self, what is it? It is pure consciousness.

However, it is not the consciousness which we have right now as body, mind,

Pranam and all of that, that is our Jaggivalka makes it clear, that won't be there, that is lost.

And that is why Swami Vivekananda also says, consciousness is gone, super-consciousness remains.

Duality is lost, non-duality remains, non-duality is the reality.

Okay, one more clarification here, and then we will go into the final mantra next time

of this section. But one clarification here, notice that enlightenment, non-duality, freedom,

they don't depend upon this transition from body to bodylessness.

It is not that after the death, this bodyless liberation, that is enlightenment. Then only there is

Moksha, then only there is at Brahman, then only there is at Dwaita, non-duality, non-duality,

non-duality, non-duality is there right now. Atman or Brahman is there right now.

Moksha is there, freedom, ultimate freedom, is there right now? It always was, is and will continue

to be. This transition is from Jeevan Mukti to, it is entirely, we are talking about the

Enlightened One. It is from Jeevan Mukti to Vidayah Mukti, Jeevan Mukti, the liberation while

living in the body, Vidayah Mukti, the transition, bodyless liberation. That is what Yagavalki is talking

about. But why is he making a big deal out of this? It is important. Why? No matter what we talk,

I have understood it, I am pure consciousness, I am the witness. Usually, our understanding is

infected, inflected and infected by the mind. So, we must be, sit steadily, calmly and contemplate,

not nobody, no mind, no senses, no thought, no intellectualization, not even deep sleep. What's

there? Reality is there, you are there, whatever always was is there. And this whole thing is an

appearance of that, whatever we are seeing right now. That one, which remains, that is the oneness

of the universe. It is formless, it is nameless, it is attributeless and yet it is the reality.

That's the thing, we must realize. Otherwise, we will somehow still think of enlightenment as

kind of an enlightened state of mind. Enlightened state of mind will be there in Jeevan Mukti,

but that also will die in, after the death of the body and passing away of the Jeevan Mukta.

Brahman is and will remain. So, it is not a suggestion that one should wait until the death

of the body and then lose all individualized consciousness and then only you are truly, truly

free. No, no, no. If Vedanta makes you or shows you your true freedom, now, here and now and forever,

this has to be kept in mind. Otherwise, there might be this attempt to, and there are people who do

that without clarity, they attempt to do that. This emulation of what Jeevan Mukti is saying,

right now in this body and mind, I will not have any particularized consciousness,

I will not see here, smell, taste, touch, I will not, there will be no in-breath, no out-breath,

stealing the breath, then stealing the thoughts, no, no vrittis, chittaritis, gone, no memory,

and sitting at a deep absorption in some state of samadhi. People think that is what Advaita

is pointing towards. No, no, no. That is also Advaita. This is also Advaita. Right now,

fully engaged with the world, Advaita. Advaita is pointing to something that is not

achievable by some kind of thinking, nor is it achievable by not thinking. It is already achieved,

it is forever achieved, it is you. So, that is what Advaita is pointing out. Advaita is giving us

information, not telling us to do something, no matter how subtle or how sophisticated.

Yeah, so that is just a clarification. Om Shante Shante Shante Shante Hari Om Tatsath Shriyama Krishnam

Arpa Namastu. A few comments and questions are there. Let me just check. Don't add any more now.

Already quite a few are there.

Sonali says, what is the etymology of the word used for Tidavas here? Sangya, yes. In Buddhism also,

Sangya means specific cognitions, buddhi. Could that compare with Tidavas or being reflected in

buddhi or ego in Vedantic paradigm? You are absolutely. And in buddhism, punches under the five

heaps, they say none of them is the self, including consciousness is one of the heaps.

And that is what exactly is being denied here. Yagyeval Kasi, that consciousness is not the real self.

That is lost during, in Samadhi, it is lost. It is lost in deep sleep also. It is lost when the

mind also dissolves after the bodyless liberation of the Videha Mukta. So, there buddhism,

you can see here, where the non-self theory of the buddhism and the self theory, they meet.

They are saying the same thing. What the non-self theory, anathma theory of the buddhist,

what it denies, Yagyeval Kasi denying here. As thorough a denial as you find them, the buddhist

masters. In fact, Yagyeval Kasi supports all of it.

The sevenfold denial, negation of Chandrakirti, where he shows in seven different ways, whatever

conception of the self you can have, none of them work. And Yagyeval Kasi would agree with all of them.

That however, does not deny the atman or Brahman, which lies beyond this sevenfold negation.

Shree Devi says, Yagyeval Kasi begins with love, something that my three already understands.

In deep love, there is a feeling of oneness and a sense that love is limitless, not something

that could get used of the more we love. Could we say that love is being used as a pointer,

because it gives a taste of enlightenment, taking her from the known to the unknown. Yes,

that is a very good way of putting it. Not only that, at the end, the real nature of not only

the self is realized, the real nature of not only existence is realized, the real nature of love

is also realized. A self, existence, love, if you realize as chit, sath, and on and on.

John says, might be a confusion, because she has not a clear glimpse of difference between

reflected conscious and pure conscious of Brahman. By desire and grace, this realization

clears with the mystery of the two apparent entities, Yagyeval Kasi refers to.

The Niddit Diasan can be practiced to abide in Brahman and leave the habit of a situation,

body, mind, behind and remain as Brahman. Does this describe the process? Yes, it does.

Once the clarity has been attained, one can practice Niddit Diasan to drive it into the mind,

to condition the mind or decondition or de hypnotize the mind, to make it reflect this clarity

all the time, that I am the witness consciousness, Brahman, not the reflected consciousness.

As Vivekanthi says, the witness, the one alone exists, the witness. He appears as nature and soul.

Nature is the entire world up to body, mind. And soul is that pure consciousness,

the witness reflected in the mind. Both are appearances. It is only when the subject appears,

the object appears. Object and subject appear together and disappear together.

This is the whole of the Buddhist teaching about the non-self.

Ramya says, is there a reason why the same word consciousness is used here for pure and reflected

consciousness? No, two different words are actually used by Yagyeval Kasi. Yagyeval Kasi uses

for pure consciousness, Pragyana Ghana, which means a mass of consciousness, condensed consciousness.

And for the empirical consciousness which we have, which disappears at death, he calls it Sangya,

our series of cognitions which we have, series of conscious experiences which we have.

Rik, presumably Vivekanthi was enlightened, yet he was none then avatar.

You mentioned that he said, you would be happy to come back, any number of times to help

humanity, a bodhisattva attitude. If we take him at his word, does this mean that there is an

option for the enlightened people to retain some remnant of individuality which could incarnate

again? Yes, but it is true. It is not like an option that is given to us, I think.

It is not that you have to fill up a form at the point of enlightenment, check the boxes.

Like you donate your organs similarly, would you be willing to come back again to help these

other fellows in this world who are not yet enlightened? No, I think at that point it depends on,

you can say it depends on the will of God, that is what Sri Ramakrishna would have said,

each or each other. Or you can say it depends on the mind set of the spiritual seeker.

If it is a bodhisattva mind set like Vivekanthi had, maybe such a person might retain a potential

for retaining an individuality which would come back as an enlightened master. That is the idea

of the bodhisattva, not just my enlightenment, the enlightenment for all. That is why the distinguished

themselves is the Mahayana path and the they call the Theravada, the Hina Yana, the lower vehicle

and the higher vehicle. Higher vehicle because it is a vaster path and your heart is vaster because

you want to carry all of universe with you. Peter says, for one who knows that they are pure

consciousness at the time of death, I would imagine that they would become sugar and not just taste

sugar is this correct, correct. That is true. You would become sugar. Two stories in this regard,

one is a senior monk once asked, this is from the reminiscences of senior monks by Swami Jaitana,

Jaitana Guruji, a senior monk once asked, Swami Shivana, the Mahapurush Maharaj, Maharaj,

we hear two things. One is Vedanta tells us that we are pure consciousness and after the

disappearance of this body, death of this body, we will remain as limitless consciousness

problem. The other thing we read about is, we are devotees of Sri Ramakrishna and after death,

we will abide in this devotional realm in the presence of Sri Ramakrishna forever,

like a heaven in a heaven in the presence of God, which is it? Again the same thing,

do you want to taste sugar or be sugar? And Swami Shivana and Ji gave two wonderful answers.

He said first, he said, Janadantanlab, Jamonbhaap, Jamonlab, as your bhava is the attitude that you

have cultivated, so will your gain be. So is what you will realize. If you are proceeded on a

devotional path, you will find after the disappearance of the body, you will enter into the presence of

the gracious omnipresent, omniscient omnipotent God and live in a divine realm eternally and so

forth. Or if your attitude is primarily of the knowledge, Ganesatitude, you will have exactly

what Yagavalka says. No individuality is lost, you remain one with the ocean, like the salt,

dull dissolved in the ocean, becoming sugar, not tasting sugar. That was Swami Shivana and Ji's

first answer. I explained a little more, he just put it briefly, he says, as you practiced,

as your bhava is, so your attainment will be. The second answer he gave was very heartfelt, he said,

but you know my boy, if you ask me, it's better to leave it to Sri Ramakrishna to Thakur.

Leave it to God. You practice, do your best, but you leave it to God because

that's a very sincere heartfelt advice from a great one. These are all words we are throwing

around, concepts, words, techniques, philosophical ideas. We are like little children playing around

with toys while the indulgent parents watch and smile. So, it's best to be honest that

I am yet talking in concepts and some intellectual clarity and some little spiritual practice and

that's my standard right now. So, I leave it to the Lord. The Lord knows what is good for me,

what I should or should not attain. This is the second story is from my own experience with Swami

Nirmuktanandaji, a disciple of the same Shivanaandaji. He was nearly a hundred when I asked him this,

Swami Ranganathanandaji, the 13th president of our order, another disciple of Swami Shivanaandaji,

a great Swami. He used to say that, I will come back again to do Swami Vivekananda's work.

So, somewhat like this, that I will not attain this bodyless liberation,

disappearing into the ocean. The salt doll will come back again after this light come back again

to do Swami Vivekananda's work. So, I asked Swami Nirmuktanandaji, is this true? So, will Swami Ranganathan

aji come back? And his answer was so rational, so balanced and matter of fact. This old Swami,

he said, that we do not know, that is up to Thakur, up to Sri Ramakrishna, but look at his attitude.

So, look at the attitude of Swami Ranganathan, the heroic attitude. I do not want Moksha,

I will come back again and again to do God's work, to do the work of Swami Vivekananda.

This attitude is a heroic attitude. This attitude is what looking at and admiring.

Sri Ramakrishna also has said, a couple of times, we will find in the gospel of Sri Ramakrishna,

there are those heroic players who play the game, it is like snakes and ladders,

but that is a particular game and they do not want to go to heaven and remain there.

They want to come back again and again, they are heroic players, they are not afraid of getting trapped

in samsara, such people are there. And it is a clear example is Ranganathanandaji.

And yet, our immediate reaction is to think in terms of be mystical. So, is he going to be reborn

again? Is he already reborn? Where is he reborn? And what is going to be it? What is it going to be

like? But Swami Nirmokthanandaji, he gave such a balanced matter of fact answer. He said, we

do not know all those things. Leave it to Sri Ramakrishna, leave it to God, but see the attitude,

the heroic attitude, that is something we can learn from and be inspired from and take strength

and courage from that. So, balanced. So, reasonable that answer.

Priya says, what is the significance behind Japa on the name and form of each term?

Since consciousness does not identify the name and form the each term anymore,

about the death of the body and the soul has merged with pure consciousness.

So, that you are saying about the end, the one who has become sugar, then there is no more relevance

of this. But on the process, in the way, one of the most powerful practices is this mantra Japa.

All this which we are doing, what is the practice actually taught here by Yadgeval Ketu May 3?

Sravana Manana Niri Thiyasana, here about it, reason about it and then meditate upon it,

basically dwell on this truth. But dwelling on this truth is very difficult.

What is one, the one capsule which we can always resort to, to dwell on this truth?

That is the technology of the mantra Japa. If you have been initiated into a mantra,

you have a direct connection with this reality. Yes, it is with Saguna Brahman, with Brahman,

with attributes. Your G1HR is there, you have to be honest. Yes, my G1HR is very much here right now.

I have not really completely dissociated myself or seen through my G1HR. I cannot say,

like Ramana Maharshi, that, oh, there is some fellow Kaur Ramana, no, I must be honest.

As long as the G1HR is powerful and dominant, one of the most powerful ways of dwelling on the

truth is the mantra Japa. Let it go on, let the mantra go on continuously.

When the Atman has merged with pure consciousness,

it means you realize, even there is no merging really. You are, you are pure consciousness,

and you realize that. Once you have realized that there is nothing needed anymore, it is done.

You don't have to repeat a mantra or something like that.

Anirban says, in Panchadashi, Kutastha is the changeless witness and Chidava Bhasa

is consciousness reflected in this Anthakkarana, in Drigdvishyavivaya,

or cognition depends on Anthakkarana-vity, then after Vidya Mukti, when no Anthakkarana-vity remains,

what exactly is the status of Chidava Bhasa? It disappears. Is it correct to say Chidava

Bhasa itself is absent, or only the Brahma-Tritva and the appearance of individual can no longer

available? Chidava Bhasa itself is absent for that individual. So, that individual remains as

the sun in the sky, like Shankaracharya says. The lake has dried up,

Mita'vising you can see beautiful songs, Sukha Gaya Bhava Sagar,

Fikerinahimohya, Taranangi. So, the whole of Bhava Sagar, the ocean of

transmigratively existence, has dried up. The ocean itself has dried up,

then I have no more anxiety regarding crossing the ocean of transmigratively existence or

are facing the terrible waves of birth and death and disease and old age and all those fears

have gone.

The ocean is gone itself.

There is no ocean.

It is dried up.

If it has dried up then the individual who was trying to cross the ocean was also dried

up because the reflection of the sun in the ocean in the water that reflected sun is

also gone.

I am giving a Vedantic interpretation to Mirabai's song, Suu Kagayabhavasagar, Fikar

and Ahimohetarananki.

All right, there are wonderful really good questions, but we have to wrap it up.

There is a quote from Bernardo, I am actually meeting him in two months since in Amsterdam.

Bernardo says, we are monkeys, it is the height of hubris to think that we could or should

be able to crack the mysteries of the universe.

What is the book from which Maharaj's reading Adi Shankaracharya is coming to?

This is the Gita press.

Brother and a Koopanishad commentary here.

This is the original Mantras and Pankaracharya's commentary on one side with the Hindi translation.

This will be very readily available from Gita press, a very authentic, reliable edition

of Shankaracharya's commentary.