End Of Knowledge

Tag: atman

  • A Conversation with Ashtavakra Pt. 23

    Read Part 22 / Ask a Question / Support End of Knowledge
    CHAPTER 15: Part Two
    Ashtavakra said:
    15:11 – In you, the infinite ocean, let the waves of the universe rise or fall according to their own nature. It means no gain or loss to you.

    The waves in the ocean continuously change but the water remains fundamentally unchanged.  In the same way, the circumstances of the body-mind and world are always changing, but as consciousness-existence you’re always the same.  So essentially, you can let the world be as it is.  This doesn’t mean you have to passively accept whatever comes to you, good or bad.  But when you understand you’re always okay as consciousness-existence, you can live your life not feeling obligated to ride the roller coaster of elation and depression that normally accompanies the changes in your personal circumstances.  Granted, this is no easy task; it takes diligence to remember who you really are amidst personal struggle.      

    15:12 – My child, you are pure consciousness.  This universe is nothing other than your self.  Therefore, how can you have the idea of acceptance or rejection?

    You can’t accept the self because you are the self.  And you can’t reject the universe because it too is you, the self.  The statements in this verse may seem confusing since they contradict the preliminary teachings of Vedanta that instruct you to reject the universe as ‘not-self’ and accept yourself as the self.  I’ll discuss this seeming contradiction further in Verse 15. 

    15:13 – How will there be birth, action or egoism for you who are the one, immutable, peaceful and all-pervasive consciousness?

    Birth—and the inevitable death that follows—along with action and egoism (the notion of being an individual, separate “I”) belong to the body-mind alone.  As non-dual, unchanging, imperturbable and omnipresent consciousness-existence, you’re free from them all.   

    15:14 – You alone shine in whatever you see, the same way that gold alone shines in gold jewelry. 

    Any time you see gold jewelry, regardless of the form it assumes, you’re seeing nothing but gold.  Similarly, whatever you see in the world, regardless of its form, is nothing but yourself. 

    15:15 – Completely give up such distinctions as “I am this” or “I am not this.” Having seen that all is the self, be desireless and happy.

    Initially, self-inquiry instructs you to completely reject all physical and mental phenomenon (the body-mind and world) as ‘not-self’ and accept yourself as consciousness-existence, the self.  But since this practice is based on the fundamental duality of ‘self’ and ‘not-self,’ in the later stages of the teaching it must be given up.  At that point it’s not a matter of “I am this (the self)” or “I am not this (the body-mind and world)” but “The body-mind and world are me but they’re merely appearances that don’t affect me.” 

    As I mentioned at Verse 12, it seems like Vedanta contradicts itself here.  And technically it does.  But Vedanta is a practical teaching that takes into account where the student begins the process of inquiry.  And for most, it’s at the stage where they naturally—albeit falsely—identify with the body-mind.  From there, to simply jump to the vision of non-duality is nearly impossible.  So an intermediate step is set up to gradually lead the student to that conclusion.  If you want to skip the first step, be my guest.  There’s no rule saying you can’t.  But for everyone else, I recommend starting at the beginning. 

    15:16 – It is through your ignorance alone that the universe exists. In reality you are one. There is no individual self or supreme self other than you.

    The universe exists—meaning it’s taken to be real—simply because it’s believed to be real, similar to the way a dream is believed to be real while it’s happening.  This is what’s referred to in this verse as “ignorance.” But just as a dream is seen to be unreal upon waking, the universe is seen to be unreal upon ‘waking’ to the knowledge that everything is yourself, consciousness-existence.  At that point it no longer ‘exists’ as an objective reality but is seen as the transient appearance it really is.

    At the beginning of the teaching, Vedanta divides the self into two parts, the individual self of the inquirer (atman) and the ‘supreme’ universal self (brahman).  Like the categories of ‘self’ and ‘not-self’ discussed in the previous verse, these distinctions are conditional and therefore temporary.  The reason for this is the same as above:  It’s easier to start your inquiry from the point with which you’re most familiar; in this case it’s the point of viewing yourself as an individual.  From there you can inquire into the nature of the ‘individual’ self, eventually seeing it’s none other than the ‘supreme’ universal self.      

    15:17 – One who knows for certain that the world is an insubstantial delusion becomes desireless.  Shining alone, come to peace as if nothing exists.

    I think it would be more accurate to say that the one who knows for certain the world is an insubstantial illusion may have less desire.  Because what living being has no desire, even if it’s just the desire to have no desire?  Besides, the conclusion of Vedanta is that you’re the self, unaffected by the presence or absence of desire in the mind.  Furthermore, if desire is part of the insubstantial delusion of the world then the presence of desire is insignificant seeing as it too is insubstantial. 

    All the same, the idea is that if you see the world is an insubstantial delusion, why would you desire anything in it?  Or alternately, if the world is nothing but yourself then what’s to desire seeing as you can only want something you don’t already have?  While this is true, it may or not help you be a happier person in your everyday life.  Why?  Because, for instance, even though you may already ‘have’ that new job insofar as it’s nothing but yourself, it doesn’t mean you’re going to feel more fulfilled in the bad job you currently have and feel stuck in.  Change is still needed.  So I would argue that it’s a matter of perspective.  Go about your business, trying to accomplish what you feel needs to be accomplished, all the while keeping in mind that you’re ultimately fine no matter what happens.           

    15:18 – In the ocean of the world, one alone was, is and ever will be.  There is no bondage or liberation for you.  There is nothing to be done or not done. Live happily. 

    You’re the self.  You’ve always been the self and you’ll never not be the self.  This means you were never bound and never will be bound.  And if you’re never bound then you can never be freed from the bondage that never existed in the first place.  The problem is that initially, you don’t know this.  So paradoxically, you have to seek liberation from your non-existent bondage though self-inquiry.  Only then can you truly see that the whole venture is an ironic farce.  At that point there’s nothing to be done or not done and you can relax. 

    15:19 – Do not disturb your mind with affirmations or negations.  Be calm and abide happily in your own self which is bliss itself.

    When you understand that you’re the self and that you alone exist, the practice of affirming yourself as the self or negating the body-mind and world as ‘not-self’ loses its value, at least as far as the question of, “Who am I?” is concerned.  But to “be calm and abide happily” in that knowledge (assuming that’s what you want) is no easy task.  Even though you know who you are, you may need to periodically remind yourself of what it means to be who you are.  In other words, you may need to affirm that you’re always alright even when things aren’t going your way and negate any belief to the contrary.  When thinking of yourself like that becomes more habitual, you can “disturb” your mind less and less with affirmations and negations and “be calm and abide happily in your own self.” 

    In this verse, Ashtavakra describes the self as being of the nature of bliss (ananda in Sanskrit).  Whether or not this description is literal is a hotly debated topic in the Vedanta world.  Considering that 1) Bliss is a transient feeling produced by the mind and 2) Vedanta clearly states the self is the permanent substratum of the mind, not a temporary product of it, I think it seems most reasonable to interpret the word bliss metaphorically.  In that case, to say the self is bliss itself means that the self is the essence of all bliss, seeing as anything sought for the sake of bliss is none other than the self. 

    Could this be viewed as a stretch, a bit of creative interpretation?  Absolutely.  But consider this:  when a feeling of bliss comes into existence, do you come into existence along with it?  No.  You already exist, otherwise a feeling of bliss couldn’t arises to you.  And when that feeling of bliss disappears, do you disappear?  No.  You continue to exist while another thought, feeling or emotion arises.  If you continuously exist before, during and after the feeling of bliss arises, how could you literally be the feeling of bliss which exists temporarily?

    15:20 – Completely give up meditation and hold nothing in your mind. You are verily the ever-free self.  What will you accomplish by thinking?

    Meditation, if you choose to do it, is a good practice for overall health, the same as exercise and healthy eating.  So just as you don’t have to give up jogging or good nutrition in light of self-knowledge you don’t have to give up meditation. 

    What really needs to be given up is the belief, held by some proponents of self-knowledge, that by meditating you can somehow become the self or merge with the self.  Why?  Because you can’t become what you already are or merge with what you already are by focusing the mind and directing its thinking (or by any other means for that matter).  So use meditation as a tool for self-inquiry until you know who you are.  After that, if you want to keep doing it simply for the sake of mental health, go for it.  But do so knowing that you’re the self whether the mind is meditating or not.   

    Read Part 22 / Ask a Question / Support End of Knowledge

  • A Conversation with Ashtavakra Pt. 16

    Read Part 15  /  Ask a Question  /  Support End of Knowledge

    CHAPTER NINE
    Ashtavakra said:
    9:1 – What is done and what is not done, as well as the pairs of opposites—when do they cease and for whom? Knowing thus, be indifferent to everything, even renunciation.

    Action is defined according to the opposites of good and bad.  And resolving to avoid bad actions is renunciation.  Renouncing bad actions is essential for purifying the mind in order to prepare it for self-knowledge but upon gaining self-knowledge, renunciation loses its meaning.  Why?  Because you see that duality—such as good and evil—is not real.  And furthermore, you understand that as consciousness-existence you’re not the doer.  So you can’t perform any action, good or bad, let alone renounce any action. 

    When you know you’re consciousness-existence, does that mean the body-mind you formerly identified with can abandon all notions of decent behavior and start robbing, killing or just being a self-centered jerk?  No.  Because as the verse astutely points out, doership and the pairs of opposites never cease.  They still totally apply to the body-mind, assuming it wants to avoid being an inmate or an outcast from society. 

    If you contend that doership and duality cease for you, consciousness-existence, you’d be wrong.  Why?  Because they never applied to you in the first place.            

    9:2 – One is fortunate whose desire for life, enjoyment, and learning have been extinguished by observing the ways of the world.

    When you observe the world and truly see that everything in it is impermanent, it’s to your benefit to become dispassionate, meaning objective.  Because if everything is impermanent attachment is illogical and unnecessary, assuming you enjoy peace of mind.  But dispassion isn’t cold-hearted stoicism, it’s simply appreciating things while they last and for what they’re worth, never expecting them to give something they can never give e.g. permanent happiness.        

    9:3 – Everything is indeed impermanent, spoiled by the threefold affliction of being worthless, contemptible and fit for rejection.  Understand this clearly and you come to peace. 

    This verse reinforces the last and it employs a bit of hyperbole.  Are friends and family really “worthless, contemptible and for rejection”?  Well, maybe some people’s family and friends are but really, the meaning here is the same as before: Be clear that nothing in the world lasts; accept that fact and be at peace.  

    9:4 – At what time or at what age do the pairs of opposites not exist?  Disregard them and you will attain perfection.

    Duality is a problem for people of every age.  But the good news is that anyone at any time can disregard it by seeing that it’s an illusion.  Then you ‘attain’ perfection by seeing that you’re the ever-perfect, undivided self.  Technically, you can’t attain this status because you are, and always have been, the self.   

    9:5 – After observing the diverse beliefs of the great seers, saints and yogis, attain equanimity by becoming completely indifferent to them. 

    Every religion and philosophy has different views about your true nature.  And since those views often conflict with one another, they can’t all be right.  So at some point you have to investigate the ones that appeal to you and with luck, you’ll find out who you really are.  Once you’ve seen that for yourself, the so-called spiritual quest is over and you can rest easy.  And then the innumerable beliefs of various teachings which formerly seemed bewildering become completely immaterial.  Because what does someone’s opinion matter in the face of firsthand experience and understanding?          

    9:6 – A teacher is one who has gained clear knowledge that they are consciousness.  Through indifference, equanimity and reasoning, they help others escape self-ignorance (samsara).

    Knowing that you’re consciousness-existence is the most important prerequisite for being a teacher (because how can you teach what you don’t know?).  Your personal behavior, even though it can be an inspiring example to students, is secondary.  So don’t be concerned if your mind isn’t perfectly indifferent and equanimous—after all, self-knowledge is knowing you aren’t the mind in any way.  But if your mind lacks the ability to reason, meaning the ability to employ reason based on the logic of Vedanta, you’re dead in the water (at least as a teacher).  In that case, shut down your website, disband your satsang and quietly enjoy your enlightenment—otherwise you’ll just confuse people.          

    9:7 – Look upon all objects as modifications of the elements and abide in your true nature (consciousness-existence) and you will at once be free from bondage.

    Anything that changes is unreal.  If all objects—both mental and physical—are simply modifications of the elements (matter), they’re unreal and can’t be you.  Furthermore, as matter they’re non-conscious—another reason they can’t be you.  Once you see that you’re not an unreal, non-conscious object (specifically the body-mind) you’re free from bondage because you know that as consciousness-existence, you were never bound.   

    9:8 – Your vasanas alone are samsara. Knowing this, renounce them all. The renunciation of your vasanas is the renunciation of samsara.  Be established [in your true nature] regardless of external circumstances. 

    Your vasanas are your personal collection of desires and mental inclinations.  Samsara, in a general sense, is the world.  But more specifically it means the everyday cycle of identifying with objects (specifically the body-mind) and the suffering caused by trying to gain or keep desired objects while avoiding or getting rid of undesired objects.  If you think about it, what’s your personal world comprised of other than what you want, what you don’t want and how you’re inclined to go about getting what you want or avoiding what you don’t want?  In that way, your vasanas are samsara. 

    Knowing this, it seems reasonable to try and escape samsara by renouncing or destroying the vasanas.   But this method won’t work.  Because even though you can achieve a significant reduction in desire and a drastic change in your personal inclinations, unless the body-mind is dead, there’s no end to your wants and mental conditioning.  So there’s no end to your samsara.  A different approach is needed. 

    Enter Vedanta, which says that to escape the samsara of your vasanas, you simply need to realize that they aren’t your vasanas in the first place.  The mind, the container of all desires and inclinations, is an unreal, transient object.  And it’s not you, consciousness-existence, which is ever-free of the mind and all its vasanas.  So to end samsara, stop identifying with the mind. 

    To be clear, working on the mind to rid it of excessive desire and negative inclinations is a very constructive endeavor, one that is an essential preparatory step on the spiritual path.  But it doesn’t equate to self-knowledge which is dis-identification with the mind in general.    

    Read Part 15  /  Ask a Question  /  Support End of Knowledge

     

  • A Conversation with Ashtavakra Pt. 7

    Have a question? Ask Here.

    Want to support End of Knowledge? Donate Here.

    Read Part 6 here. 

    Janaka said:
    2:11 – Salutations to myself who would not be destroyed even if the entire universe, from the creator down to a clump of grass, were destroyed. 

    The universe is purely an illusion so regardless of its condition or whether it be present or absent, you remain completely unchanged. 

    The mention of a creator in this verse does establish that one actually exists any more than the mention of a clump of grass establishes the reality of grass—they are both illusory.  This means the creator and the grass are mentioned figuratively for the sake of example in order to make it clear that absolutely everything in the apparent creation—from the ‘highest’ (the creator) to the ‘lowest’ (a clump of grass)—could be destroyed and you would be unaffected.  But this does not change the fact that the creator and the grass never really exist.  In a non-dual reality, there is only the self-existent self that never changes—nothing, therefore, can be created.  If nothing can be created, then there can’t be a creator. 

    Student:  Isn’t the universe a creation? 

    Teacher:  No, it is an illusion. 

    Student:  Well, isn’t the illusion of the universe a creation, like an illusion created by a magician?    

    Teacher:  When a magician saws a person in half, does she create a person that has been cut in two? 

    Student: No. 

    Teacher:  Then how can you speak of a magician creating something? 

    Student:  Granted, the magician doesn’t literally create a person sawed in half.  But she does create the appearance of a person sawed in half, yes? 

    Teacher:  Yes.  But the magician is separate from her illusion—they are distinct entities.  So your example doesn’t apply to the topic at hand because unlike the duality of the magician and her illusion, reality is non-dual.  There is only you, consciousness-existence, not you plus a creation called “illusion.”     

    Student:  But I see the illusion.          

    Teacher:  I do too.  No one is denying that.  But my point is that seeing the illusion of the universe doesn’t mean the universe actually exists or that it’s a literal creation.  Tell me: is the illusion of the universe separate or non-separate from consciousness-existence?    

    Student:  If reality is non-dual, then it must be non-separate. 

    Teacher:  So the illusion of the universe can’t be anything other than consciousness-existence, correct?

    Student:  Yes.    

    Teacher:  Is consciousness-existence ever created?  Does it ever change?    

    Student:  No.  It is self-existent and it doesn’t change.     

    Teacher:  Creation, by definition, is when something new is brought into existence or something already existent is changed to make something new.  If consciousness-existence is the only thing that exists and it can’t be created or changed, creation is not possible.  Creation is only an idea, a baseless illusion caused by not knowing that what appears to be the creation is really consciousness-existence.   

    Student:  What if the universe isn’t brought into existence because it already exists in a potential form in consciousness-existence, similar to the way a pot exists in a potential form in clay? That way, creation is the universe manifesting, like a pot manifesting from clay.    

    Teacher:  Manifestation implies change so on those grounds, creation is still not possible. 

    Student:  But the fundamental nature of consciousness-existence wouldn’t change because the manifestation of the universe would only be apparent.  It would be like a pot apparently manifesting from clay without changing the fundamental nature of the clay.   

    Teacher:  “Apparent manifestation” means “doesn’t actually manifest” and that is just another way of saying illusion—I think you’ve proven my point.  But before moving on, let’s take one last look at the notion of the universe existing in consciousness-existence in potential.  This is the theory that consciousness-existence is the cause and the universe is the created effect.  To see if this can be true, let’s go back to the example of the clay and the pot, the clay being the cause and the pot being the potential effect that exists in the clay.  Now, is the potential pot clay or something other than clay?      

    Student:  It would have to be clay.   

    Teacher:  Then nothing other than the clay exists, yes? 

    Student:  Yes.

    Teacher:  If nothing other than the clay exists, then the pot must be non-existent.  And a non-existent pot can never come into existence as an effect.  If the effect doesn’t exist, then the clay can’t be a cause.  It can only appear to be a cause when the apparent effect of the pot is believed to be a real entity.  In the same way, if nothing other than consciousness/existence exists, then the universe must be non-existent.  And consciousness-existence can’t be the cause of a non-existent effect.  It can only appear to be a cause when the apparent effect of the universe is believed to be real.     

    Student:  This all makes sense on a logical level but the fact that the universe appears as part of my everyday experience makes the issue confusing.    

    Teacher:  Yes, it is confusing—that’s the nature of ignorance.  Tell me, have you ever seen a gold bracelet?  

    Student:  Of course.    

    Teacher:  Even though the circular shape of the bracelet appears in your experience, is there anything there besides gold?

    Student:  No. 

    Teacher:  Ok.  You, consciousness-existence are like the gold and the form of the bracelet is like the appearance of the universe.  Just as the circular shape is an illusion that is never really produced—despite being seen—the universe is an illusion that is never actually created, even though it is experienced.  In the end you can’t even say the universe exists even as an illusion because similar to the way the circular shape of a bracelet is purely gold with nothing added whatsoever, so the universe is absolutely nothing but you, consciousness-existence.                   

    2:12 – Salutations to myself who, despite having a body, am one alone.  Because I pervade the entire universe, I neither go anywhere nor come from anywhere. 

    Based on his previous statement, it’s obvious that Janaka knows he is consciousness-existence and that consciousness-existence never has a body.  So when he says “despite having a body, [I] am one alone” he means, “despite looking like I have a body, [I] am one alone.”  The one with self-knowledge knows that even though they ‘have’ a body—meaning it continues to appear post-enlightenment—it is an unreal appearance that neither affects nor divides them in any way. 

    2:13 – Salutations to myself.  There is none equal to my capability, I who forever support the entire universe without touching it with the body.

    The body-mind is the instrument of action.  So what is meant by the statement “without touching it (the universe) with the body” is that consciousness-existence ‘supports’ the universe—meaning it makes the existence of the universe possible—without doing anything whatsoever because existence is it’s very nature.  Since nothing but consciousness-existence exists, nothing else has the ‘capability’ to ‘support’ the appearance of the universe by ‘lending’ it existence.         

    2:14 – Salutation to myself who have nothing or have all that is thought and spoken of.

    This is a reiteration of what was said in Verse 2:2.    

  • A Conversation with Ashtavakra Pt. 6

    This week, Janaka continues his statement of self-knowledge from PART 5.

    Janaka said:
    2:6 – Just as crystallized sugar is completely permeated by the sweetness of the sugarcane from which it is produced, so the universe produced in me is completely permeated by me. 

    The true nature of something is that which is essential to its existence, something that, if taken away, the thing itself would cease to be.  For instance, if it were possible to remove heat from fire or wetness from water they would no longer exist, because heat and wetness are the essence of fire and water.

    On the other hand, an incidental quality of something is that which can be removed or changed while the nature of the thing itself remains unchanged.  If the color of fire changes from red to blue, the fact that it’s hot does not. This means the color of the fire—as opposed to heat, its essential nature—is merely an incidental quality.  Similarly, the form of water can change from a wave, to mist to rain but the wetness of the water does not; the form of the water is an incidental quality while the wetness of the water is its true nature.   

    That doesn’t mean an incidental quality is separate from the thing it is removed from.  The red, yellow or blue color of a flame is completely permeated by the heat of the fire from which it comes.  And there is no wave—from a ripple in a pond to a tsunami in the ocean—that is in any way separate from the wetness of the water from which it is comprised. Knowing this relationship between the essential nature of something and its incidental qualities, what Janaka says in this verse can be understood.  Just as crystallized sugar is permeated by sweetness, the essential nature of sugar cane, so the universe is pervaded by consciousness/existence, the essential nature of the self.  But unlike sugarcane, which undergoes a real transformation to become sugar—meaning after the sugar is produced, the sugarcane is gone—the self never transforms into objects.  It only appears to do so, in the same way that water appears to become a wave.

    2:7 – The world appears because of self-ignorance and disappears owing to self-knowledge, just as a snake appears from non-cognition of a rope and disappears when the rope is recognized. 

    You only see the world when you don’t understand that it’s the self, the same way that you only see a snake when you don’t realize it’s a rope.  And just as you can no longer see a snake when you become aware of the existence of the rope, you can no longer see the world when you have knowledge of the self.  However, the literal meaning of the word “see” only applies to the example of the snake and the rope, because seeing a snake where there is only a rope is a perceptual error that disappears when the rope is known.  But in the case of mistaking the self to be the world, even after you realize it is the self, the ‘snake’ of the world does not go away.  You continue to perceive and experience the world exactly the same way as someone who does not know they are the self; the only difference is that you no longer believe the world is real.          

    2:8 – Light is my very nature and I am never other than that.  I alone shine, even when the universe appears. 

    As previously mentioned (1:18), light is a metaphor for consciousness because it is the invariable factor in every experience that ‘illuminates’ all objects by making it possible for them to be known.  Nothing in the universe has the ability to ‘shine’ in this way, not even apparently luminous objects such as the sun.  Not even its light can ‘illumine’ anything—meaning make something known—without you, consciousness, being present. 

    2:9 – The universe appears in me, conceived through ignorance, just as silver appears in mother of pearl, as a snake appears in a rope or water appears in the desert (as a mirage). 

    As Janaka unequivocally states, the only reason the universe appears is ignorance.  Although it seen it never actually exists, just as silver, a snake or water, although seen, never exist in mother of pearl, a rope or a mirage.  From this fact it follows that there is no need to waste time trying to understand how or why the universe manifests because it never does.  It only seems to when you do not know that it is really just you, consciousness/existence. 

    Even if that makes sense, you may be tempted to inquire into the nature of ignorance or perhaps to whom it belongs.  But this too is unproductive, because the nature of self-ignorance, to state the obvious, is not knowing you are the self.  And if you do not know you are the self, then the self-ignorance belongs to you.  At that point the only pertinent thing to do is to get rid of the ignorance, not sit around pondering what ignorance is. Luckily, Vedanta gives you the tools to do this.  Ironically, when inquiry guided by the logic of Vedanta removes ignorance, it clearly demonstrates that you, the self, were never ignorant in the first place; it only seemed that way when you thought you were the body-mind.       

    2:10 – Just as a clay pot is dissolved into clay, a wave is dissolved into water and a gold bracelet is dissolved into gold, so the universe which has emanated from me will dissolve into me.

    There are two ways in which a clay pot, a wave and a gold bracelet can be dissolved into clay, water and gold, respectively.  The first way is literal: the form of the clay pot, the wave or the gold bracelet are physically destroyed, leaving behind the clay, water or gold from which they are composed. The second way is figurative: the clay pot, wave or gold bracelet are ‘dissolved’ into clay, water or gold through understanding that a clay pot is nothing but clay, a wave is only water and a gold bracelet is none other than gold.  In the same way, the universe is ‘dissolved’ into you, consciousness/existence, by the knowledge that it is consciousness/existence alone. 

    Have a question?  ASK HERE. 

    Want to support the work of End of Knowledge? DONATE HERE. 

    Please help by using the “Share” buttons below to re-post this article on Twitter, Facebook or Google.  

  • A Conversation with Ashtavakra Pt. 5

    CHAPTER TWO

    Through Ashtavakra’s instruction in the first chapter, Janaka gets enlightened.  Chapter Two is Janaka’s statement of self-knowledge.    

    Read Part 4 here.

    Janaka said:
    2:1 – I am consciousness: without defect, tranquil, and beyond the material world.  All this time I have been deceived by delusion. 

    As previously mentioned (in Part Two), enlightenment or self-knowledge is a matter of identity.  When you are ignorant of your true nature, you mistakenly identify with the body-mind.  But when you know what your true nature is, you correctly identify with consciousness.  You can tell that Janaka now clearly identifies with consciousness instead of the body-mind by the way he starts speaking of consciousness in the first person, saying “I am consciousness” instead of “consciousness is (such and such)” as if he were describing something other than himself.  For that reason, the verses in Chapter Two are excellent for meditation, recitation and contemplation.        

    When Janaka says that he is beyond the material world, it does not mean that consciousness is in one place and the material world in another because consciousness has no spatial location.  Furthermore, since reality is non-dual, there cannot be both a world and consciousness.  So to say that consciousness is beyond the material world means that consciousness is not affected by the illusory appearance of the world.   

    2:2 – As I alone reveal this body, even so do I reveal this universe. The entire universe is mine; or alternately, nothing is mine. 

    The entire universe—which includes the body—is a known object.  That which knows it is consciousness.  In this way consciousness ‘reveals’ everything in the universe.

    In the second part of the verse Janaka switches from the empirical viewpoint to the absolute viewpoint (see 1:16 for explanation of viewpoints).   From the empirical viewpoint, which provisionally accepts the appearance of the universe, it can be said that everything ‘belongs’ to consciousness since everything is consciousness.  Yet, from the absolute viewpoint, which does not admit of the universe whatsoever, nothing belongs to consciousness because there is nothing other than consciousness to belong to it. 

    2:3 – Having left behind the body and the universe, I now see the highest self.

    When people get enlightened, they continue to have bodies that exist in the universe.  If this were not so, then the moment Janaka got enlightened he would have disappeared and been unavailable to make these statements.  Actually, if this were not so, Janaka would not have gotten enlightened in the first place because Ashtavakra, his enlightened teacher, wouldn’t have been there to teach him.  So when Janaka says he has left behind the body and the universe, they remain as they are but he has ‘left them behind’ by recognizing them for the illusion they are and ceasing identification with the body. 

    In this chapter, Janaka starts referring to consciousness/existence as “the self” (atman).  In the sense that consciousness/existence is what you truly are, it is the “self.”  Therefore, the terms will be used synonymously in the text from here forward. 

    Sight being a common symbol of knowledge, when Janaka says that he sees the self he means he understands that he is the self, not that the self is some kind of object of perception.  That this self is the “highest self” means that consciousness/existence is the true self, as opposed to the false self of the body-mind.    

    2:4 – As waves, foam and bubbles are not different from water, so the universe emanating from me is not different from me.

    At first, Vedanta posits two fundamentally dualistic categories: self (consciousness/subject/knower/witness) and ‘not-self’ (non-conscious/object/known/witnessed).  But seeing as reality is ultimately non-dual, these two categories can only be conditionally accepted.  You may ask, “Then why use them at all?”  The answer is that in the beginning of the teaching the concept of ‘not-self’ provides a stable and critically important platform from which to inquire, one that helps you objectify the body-mind and see that it is unreal.  Once the body-mind is clearly known to be an illusion that never affects your true nature, the temporary dualistic split of self and ‘not-self’ must be mended in order for the ultimate truth of non-duality to be grasped.  Examining the relationship between water and its various manifestations is an excellent way to do this. 

    Initially, it can be said that waves, foam and bubbles are different from water because the waves etc. are transient, ever-changing and possessed of form while the water is ever-present, unchanging and formless. But when the existence of the waves etc. is negated by the knowledge that they are only water, it must be said that the waves etc. are non-different from water because they are not really there; there is ever only water and therefore nothing else exists to be different from it. 

    Similarly, at first it can be said that the self and the ‘not-self’ are different because the ‘not-self’ is transient, ever-changing and possessed of form while the self (consciousness/existence) is ever-present, unchanging and formless.  But when the existence of the ‘not-self’ is negated by knowledge that only the self exists, it must said that the ‘not-self’ is non-different from the self in the sense that there is nothing other than the self to be different from the self.   

    It could be argued that it would be more efficient to simply skip the first step that falsely admits of something other than the self in order to go directly to the truth of non-duality.  However, very few people can do this because at first the idea of non-duality appears to stand in direct opposition to their everyday experience.  And when people are still convinced that there is such a thing as the ‘not-self’ (objects of experience) it is not productive to merely deny its existence.  Therefore, Vedanta, being eminently practical, offers an intermediate step.  It conditionally accepts the ‘not-self’ and then provides you with the tools that are needed to understand that it only appears to exist while you, the self, are the only thing that actually exists.  When that is known, the temporary difference between self and ‘not-self’ is discarded in favor of the non-dual view that there is only the self.  This view is reiterated in the next verse using the analogy of cloth and thread and requires no additional commentary.            

    2:5 – As cloth, when analyzed, is found to be nothing but thread, so this universe, when analyzed, is nothing but me. 

    Have a question?  ASK HERE. 

    Want to support the ongoing work of End of Knowledge? DONATE HERE.