 
ALAKH NIRANJAN

Death to Deathless

A Beginners Guide to Spiritual Enlightenment

By Swami Saurabhnath

Copyright 2014, Swami Saurabhnath, all rights reserved.

Smashwords Edition, License Notes

Thank you for downloading this free eBook. You are welcome to share it with your friends. This book may be reproduced, copied and distributed for non-commercial purposes, provided the book remains in its complete original form. If you enjoyed this book, please return to Smashwords.com to discover other works by this author. Thank you for your support.

Dedicated in the feet of my Master, though He is in name and form still He transcends name and form expressing the Cosmic Order. I must mention the love and support which I got from my Grand Mother Usha K. Pathak, Mother Alka. A Tambe, rest of the family and my friend Sri Makaranda P. Deshpande, I am thankful to all of them. - Saurabh
Table of Contents

Preface

Chapter One: - Adhyātma (Spirituality)

Real definition of spirituality (Adhyātma)

Why should we think about spirituality?

Need of a Guru

More about This Book

Chapter Two: - Views about Consciousness

What is Consciousness?

Chārwāka or Lokāyata

Buddhist

Jaina

Sānkhya

Nyāya and Vaiśeshika

Yoga

Pūrva Mimānsaka

Uttar Mimānsa or Vedānta

Different concepts of Moksha

Chapter Three: - Critique of Atheistic Science.

Atheistic Science

Biggest hurdle for Materialist Evolutionists

Panspermia

Two sides of science

Artificial Intelligence

Intelligent Design Movement

God-of-gaps argument

Scientists' Quotes about God

The Hard Problem of Consciousness

Chapter Four: - Secret Method of Vedānta

Secret Method

What is Enlightenment?

Significance of Enlightenment

Means of Enlightenment

Jīvanmukti

Does Enlightenment happen suddenly or gradually?

Videha Mukti

The Qualifications for Dnyānayoga

Māyā

Brahmsūtra and Srimad Bhagavad Gītā

Chapter Five: - Removing Doubts

Brahman itself appears as Jīvātmā to experience Māyā

Four Bodies of Soul

If we are born from Īśvara then why is there need for spiritual evolution?

What is ANĀHAT NĀDA?

Discussion with a friend about possibility of soul.

Is it possible to do something against Īśvara's will?

Do we have free will?

How to destroy the ego?

What is good and bad action according to Karma yoga?

Is it right to kill the killer to save my body?

I do not understand how can enlightened people say that there is no doer, when I have to do work to earn money?

What is the exact meaning of chidābhāsa?

Does Advaita lead to a passive life?

If I am God then I am the creator of the world, but why can't I live life as I want?

Do 'I' am also perceived by God?

Is this world real?

If we all are one, then, why I cannot feel your sensations?

Why suffering is there?

If everyone becomes enlightened then will this world come to an end forever?

When any animal is cloned then what might happen with its soul?

Why not everyone become enlightened with one person becoming enlightened?

Why should we bother about good and evil if everything is Brahman?

Is enlightenment a permanent new state of happiness?

Should we try to be happy in all situations?

What should I do with my anger?

Conclusion

About the Author

Other books by Swami Saurabhnath
Preface

Namaste,

Guru Vandanā - Om brahmānandam parama sukhadam kevalam Dnyānamūrtim | Dvandvātītam Gagana sadruśam tatvamasyādilakshyam | Ekam Nityam Vimalam Achalam sarvadhī sākshibhūtam | Bhāvātītam trigunarahitam sadgurum tam namāmi ||

(I bow down to the Master who is full of bliss and happiness, who is pure Consciousness only, who is beyond any duality and all-pervading like space, who is indicated by great sentence like tatvamasi. I offer my obeisance to the Master who is alone, eternal, pure, immovable, and witness of everything, who is beyond birth and death, who is beyond the qualities of nature.)

Before entering into the book, I would like to share with you the purpose of writing this book. This book is about spiritual enlightenment, which is the subject of many philosophers and mystics from unknown past. However, on the other hand there are atheists who always try to avoid this subject altogether by denying the very existence of Consciousness independent of matter and calling any spiritual experience as disfunctioning of neurons.

Since the dawn of thought, the debate between theism and atheism is going on. We have not reached any conclusion yet, and it seems this question is always going to remain there, because no matter how many discoveries science or our intellect makes, it is always going to be unsuccessful in explaining the purpose of life without Consciousness. Today intellectual process of science depends on observation and repetition of observed phenomena in labs. However, this process is useless in knowing the cause behind that phenomenon, such process explains us how an event takes place, but such process cannot explain why that event takes place if we deny conscious thought behind it. So far, in search of reality behind life, scientists have reached the quantum physics in material things and DNA molecule, which is a huge storage of biological information, in living things. Science can explain the functions of DNA, modify it synthetically and create hybrid species from it but science can never tell why and how the DNA is there, what is the purpose of material nature to give birth to that DNA, while matter itself is purposeless without Consciousness. By observing different functions of material nature, atheists keep telling how something functions and think that they are explaining the cause behind the natural events. This procedure of understanding functioning of nature's events is not useful in understanding the purposeful behavior of entire nature in fixed but unknown direction. To this kind of arguments atheist answers is fixed that, there is no purpose behind life, everything happens just by accident. This statement is self-contradictory, on one hand, we see cause and effect relationship or purpose in every event that takes place and on other hand we say there is no purpose. Moreover, even deeper questions arise, why we all are here. Why this life is flourishing and why matter is purposefully following rules of physics to help life manifest and maintain itself. If we accept the atheist's postulation that the life is purposeless and it is just an accident then we cannot come to any meaningful conclusion. Scientists "assume" that matter is following rules of physics just because it is so. This kind of assumption is not useful in this matter, because matter itself is insentient, it cannot behave purposefully, and if it behaves purposefully then we have to conclude that the matter is not insentient as it looks, it has an inherent intelligence which is operating it.

We do not see anything happening in this world without any purpose or cause and effect relationship. Everything is effect of some cause. Nothing here is born out of nothing or without any cause. Then how can scientists deny this observation. Another problem that objective science faces is the problem of knower, scientists investigate into matter but they cannot investigate about themselves objectively, the knower of all objects remain untouched by third person observation method, because knower cannot be made the object of knowing.

Scientists cannot explain the cause behind life, however, our common sense can, and our ancient sages have explained it. The life we are living is not purposeless but it is there to express the energy and bliss universe has in it. How? We will discuss in the rest of the book.

I am Saurabh A. Tambe; a disciple of Nāth Sampradāya in Maharashtra, India. However, I am not a Sanyāsi (Monk). I live a very ordinary life, not a monastic life; however do my Sādhanā everyday as my Guruji told me. One night it happened that after doing my meditation I went to sleep. As always, before going to sleep I was getting trapped in thoughts, and suddenly my awareness became intense, thoughts disappeared from the scene. This world had already disappeared from the scene because of sleep and now thoughts, in form of dreams, were also not there. I was drifting into unfathomable & silent being, outside of the space and time that we always experience. A sense of worry about my body and my mother arose in me. I resisted to that drift and soon I was back in my body. Later I talked about this with my Guruji, he explained to me that in reality we belong to that dimension which is beyond space and time and not to the body-mind. There is no need to worry about body while going into silence because any way body works on its own. We have a very small role in maintaining body, most of the time it takes care of itself. The body is the part of the world of time and space, in the words of Vedānta, body is the part of māyā. This was the first profound experience of pure Self or Oneness or Brahman in my life, the deathless, which I mentioned in the title. It changed my understanding of life completely; life became more easy and blissful. By word bliss I do not mean objective happiness because objective happiness belongs to this world of duality and with it comes unhappiness, they are two sides of same coin; we cannot choose anyone of them independently. But bliss (ānanda) has got completely different quality; it does not have anything against it because it belongs to the Non-Dual Existence or one can say God, it is the experience of profound peace, always. In my mother tongue Marathi and in Sanskrit, there is a word ānanda, bliss is the English counterpart of this word. However bliss does not convey the complete and precise meaning of ānanda, if I try to explain it then I can say that ānanda means the happiness without any object of happiness, it is like the sweetness of sugar without sugar, just sweetness.

I thought I should share my experience with people but most of the people in society are not interested in such experiences. I talked about this with few friends but they also understood to a certain extent because it was useless for them. What would they do of it? Later, a thought came into mind that if I want to share my experience with other people then I will have to explain it in a way that they understand it completely. I will have to give unbeatable logic which will be difficult to refute by any ideology that is evolved at least until now, because people live in the world of thoughts if we have to explain them something then we have to put it intelligently. In addition, explanation has to be in a manner that it will help people to have this kind of experience themselves, if they want. Therefore, a practical "Sādhanā" or method to become peaceful is also necessary. However, all this is not possible in verbal discussions where we cannot put topics systematically because in the flow of talk main topic remains aside. Therefore, I thought it might be useful to write a book. Hence I started writing this book, this book is useful to understand about the concept of spiritual enlightenment. It is just introductory about the theory or philosophy but also contains practical method to achieve happiness and peace. I am planning to write more advanced books full of philosophical discussion in future if I get enough time. A doubt may arise here that what is the process of enlightenment? Does it happen suddenly as some enlightened people suggest or is it a gradual process and happens slowly as tradition suggests. My understanding is it depends on the concept that we have in mind when we use word enlightenment. If we consider any spiritual experience as enlightenment then we have to accept that it happens suddenly. If we consider Self-knowledge without any doubts as enlightenment then it happens gradually. However, no one can get the fruits of enlightenment i.e. peace of mind in all situations of life, happiness etc. suddenly; everyone has to go through a long process of purification of mind even if one has the experience of pure Consciousness. It might be possible that someone has completed the process of purifying mind in previous birth, and then such a person can have fruits of enlightenment immediately after realizing the Self.

Many people in past have mentioned spiritual experiences so I decided to read about different ideologies. I had studied Advaita philosophy from my childhood but was unaware of other philosophical explanations about the world and Consciousness. After studying different philosophical paths in brief, I found that Advaita Vedānta perfectly fits in the idea which I had in mind (to give a right kind of Sādhanā to people to live life happily and peacefully). As I know, Zen and Sufi people also have such experiences but I don't know them thoroughly and don't have enough resources to study about them. Therefore, I decided to take help from Vedānta to explain my understanding to other people. It is true that today we live in different kind of world than the one which was there at the time of Ādi- Śankarāchārya, the promoter of Advaita philosophy, that's why I have avoided so many dogmas, which are there with Vedānta Philosophy because I don't think they are necessary in today's world of democracy. There are few people today who try to follow Vedānta as it was thousands of years before, I have deep respect for them and I apologize to them for using their ideology without formal initiation in Sanyās. I think though the writer of this book is not a monk still this book will be useful for people to understand Advaita more easily.

I have written this book as an introduction to spiritual Enlightenment especially for the seekers who want to experience life in a different way, who are in search for something mystical in our day-today life. These people will benefit most from this book. Though Advaita does not advice to go in search of any mystical experience but following the Advaita philosophy, one can have mystical experiences. Ultimately, our goal is not any particular experience which starts and ends in time but a continuous undercurrent of calmness which can last forever. Advaita also has same goal hence it refuses any attempt to achieve samādhi or trance and advocates to be always aware of Brahman.

The people, who want just entertainment or intellectual exercise, will get it to a certain extent through the logical discussion of different paths and science discussed in this book. I have used some logical points to prove the existence of Īśvara or Consciousness but in reality if somebody does not want to accept any proof other than direct perception then no logic or inference can prove anything to him. Therefore, this book will be useful for the people who don't have any prejudice in their mind and who are ready to change their old thinking patterns without clinging to materialism.

The Nāth Sampradāya, in which I was initiated, also belongs to Advaita Philosophy but it is more for ordinary people than monks. In Nāth Sampradāya we don't go to Himālaya to find Īśvara because Himālaya or any other mountain is also a part of this physical plane and there is not much change in the situation compared to other places. At the same time, we do not think going to Himālaya and doing Sādhanā there is wrong if somebody has left with no responsibility in society. We do not get diksha (initiation) of Sanyāsa (renunciation) or brahmacharya (celibacy) because getting Sanyāsa is useful for personal spiritual growth; however, it is not good for society as a whole. Being celibate might be useful in some sense but on the other hand it can grow our ego to the level of Kings and rulers which is more harmful to our Sādhanā than doing sex or living life of a house holder man. Therefore, we follow the rule of law and fulfill the householder's responsibilities and continue living life with combination of four aspects of Sādhanā which are Dnyāna (Knowledge), Karma yoga (work without attachment in result), Bhakti (Devotion) and Dhyāna (Meditation). Among all these four, Bhakti is not in our hands, it is awarded by Īśvara to us if we remain loyal and continue doing Karma as suggested by Lord Krushna in Srimad Bhagavad Gītā. Meditation is in our hands and we have to adjust time in order to meditate. I usually meditate for three times a day doing all my other work (this is optional of course, because, sometimes situations may not allow us to strictly follow such resolve, we should try our best to take about half an hour for meditation per day, otherwise, selfless and attachmentless action can also be useful along with knowledge, meditation can be done before going to sleep or after waking from sleep in the morning). However, only meditation cannot help that's why I have mentioned another secret method (Knowledge) from Advaita Vedānta philosophy which can help us achieve serenity faster than anything else. Somebody may ask me what authority do I have to write this book, am I enlightened and become jīvanmukta? Answer to this is, I am not writing out of any authority, I am just sharing my views in this book. As far as the question of my own enlightenment is concerned, I do not think it is necessary for readers to know my credentials. I think one should read this book and consider the points, which I have mentioned in it. Still if anybody wants to know about my credentials then answer is yes and no both. Yes because I am enlightened about my real nature and no because there is no "I" in enlightenment, as I say, "I am enlightened", I am caught in ego and ignorance. Therefore, answer to this question is silence. In this book, I have given information of Dnyāna Yoga (Knowledge) without much philosophical debate (because this book is just an introduction). According to our traditional approach only knowledge can make us enlightened of spiritual truths. Dnyānyoga is a technique that cuts the stream of mundane and worldly thoughts with higher-level thoughts of spiritual inquiry, and ultimately when we understand the reality then we have to surrender those higher-level thoughts in meditation or silent prayer because the truth is beyond the thoughts. I have also described other three parts but readers will have to implement them in their life otherwise they are not much useful. This book can be a systematic guide to spiritual enlightenment. I don't claim that one will become instantly peaceful (free from anxiety and worry) after reading this book, however one will know exactly what Enlightenment (ātmadnyāna) means (as our real nature) and will surely start journey in this very life. If the efforts are authentic (i.e. one completes Sādhana chatushtaya) and Īśvara or Cosmic Order allows then one day the readers will have experience of our own pure Self or Brahman, which is beyond the limits of time.

Thank you.

Back to Top

### Chapter One: - Adhyātma (Spirituality)

The topic of this book is spiritual enlightenment. Before going into details of enlightenment, I want to clearly state that what I mean by spirituality. By word spirituality, I do not mean interaction with deceased relatives or meetings with celestial beings. I am using word spirituality in the sense it is used in Indian culture. In India, we use word Adhyātma for spirituality. Therefore, when I say spiritual enlightenment, I mean becoming aware of our own Self or ātmā (ātma dnyāna).

Real definition of spirituality (Adhyātma)

Some people have defined "Adhyātma" as "knowedge about soul." (adhi – about, ātmā – soul) But this is wrong definition, spirituality or Adhyātma does not mean "knowledge about soul" but it means "knowledge of Self", it is about us. The core subject of Adhyātma is inquiry about the nature of self or Consciousness of the living beings. If we call it soul then it seems that soul is different and we are different, therefore, Self is more precise word. In this book I have also used the word soul however, I am clearly defining my intention behind this word in the beginning that it is synonymous to Self or Consciousness. Adhyātma is to look inside our own self, and investigate about the nature of the Self. It is not dissection of a corpse and looking inside the dead body for the search of Soul or Self, like scientists do, but looking inside living beings while they are alive. Looking into a dead body will tell us about the anatomy of body but it is useless for inquiry of Self or Consciousness.

Why should we think about spirituality?

This is another fundamental question that what is the need for us to think about spirituality. Well, answer for this question depends on each individual. If anybody does not need to do any inquiry about the self then nobody can force him or her. But we are human beings and we cannot become satisfied just with our day to day activities of earning money and enjoying food and sex. That is why people take interest in politics, social activities, arts etc.; however spirituality comes after all of these needs are satisfied at least to some extent. Then man starts inquiring about this world, and how it works, and then obvious question arises what will happen with me (or Self) after death? To solve this question we have to clearly understand what actually Self is. Until we understand what we are, we cannot live life peacefully because when our understanding about ourselves is wrong then we fix wrong goals in our life and obviously suffer a lot. If anybody takes this quest of realizing our Self seriously then he or she can walk on the path of spirituality, if a person ignores this basic need of Self realization and keeps running before mundane objects then there is no hope for spiritual journey for that person.

Need of a Guru

This is the first step when we start our spiritual journey. Until now, we have found in Indian tradition that Guru is absolute necessity for relatively quick progress on the path of Adhyātma, as any other field. However, currently we are facing situation when so many so-called Gurus seem to be involved in wrong activities. Looking at such things people get confused so we have to consider the question of need of a Guru again. Here we have to understand what role Sadguru plays in the life of a disciple. First, we have to understand the definition of Sadguru given in our Śāstra (scriptures) that is "Śrotriya Brahmanishtha". There are two words; one is "Śrotriya" which means the person who has enough intellectual understanding of different opinions about Consciousness and who is able to identify the correct path through logic, who is able to explain right meaning of scriptures.

Second word in definition is "Brahmanishtha", which means the person who has first person experience of pure self-supported Consciousness and he knows not only theoretically but also experientially. The peace of enlightenment should be spread on all over his life. This is the definition of Sadguru.

Now we should look at the role that Guru plays in the life of a disciple. First, Guru logically explains to disciple the correct path and goal of spirituality. Then He suggests a practical Sādhana (discrimination and detachment with the help of meditation) to disciple so that disciple can understand the Brahman and have the first person experience of Ātmā or pure Consciousness and become peaceful. It is ok till this level; anybody can do this with little study of scriptures. However, the second part of definition of Sadguru that is Brahmanishtha, is completely beyond the capacity of any disciple to identify because there is no way to identify that if any person is Brahmanishtha or not. There are no fixed rules for any Brahmanishtha or Jīvanmukta to follow. Therefore, he can be rich like a king or poor like a beggar depending upon the prārabdha karma (destiny), he can behave like a schizophrenic or he can behave like a wise man. We do not have any criteria that we can use to judge a Jīvanmukta (Brahmanishtha).

Taking this into consideration Guru Govinda Singh, the last Guru of Sikhism declared that after him, there will be no human guru and Sikhs should consider the book Guru Granth Sāhiba as their only Guru. Rāmdāsa Swāmī (Maharashtra) also declared that if anybody wants to meet him after his death then he or she should read his books Dāsabodha and Ātmārāma, then that person will understand the message of Swāmī Rāmdāsa and reach the ultimate goal of spirituality.

Here somebody may ask if there are already books written by Sadguru-s then what is the need of another book written by me. The answer is simple, yes it is right that there are already books written by Sadguru-s but their language is not contemporary. Their language was suitable for people in past, however, it is not useful today. Therefore, it is possible to have wrong interpretation of those books. Therefore, I am writing this book in contemporary language that can be helpful to people who are present now. In future my books also will become outdated and then enlightened people of that time will write books in the language of those days. Ok, back to our subject, most of the disciples can't identify real Guru. Is there any way left then or should we start journey on our own. The answer to this question is "Yes" there is a way and we should not start spiritual journey on our own. Because it is almost impossible for everybody to reach the goal of Self-realization on his or her own, there may be few exceptions. Starting journey on our own can give birth to very strong ego. Then what is the way left for a disciple? The only way is to surrender to Īśvara. That is why Guru-s in past have said to think their books as Guru, but if we read those books, the only message written in those books is "surrender to Īśvara." Surrender to God is central issue of this book also.

More about This Book

This book provides a brief view of different paths in spirituality. I do not claim to have complete and correct knowledge of these paths and always welcome anybody who has got deeper understanding to help me gain more insight about these paths. My goal in this book is not to decide who is right but to decide whom we should follow using the best logic and reason possible.

I have discussed some of the fundamental concepts of various religions. It is not my intention to humiliate them or prove them wrong but to show the flawed logic which they seem to use and which can lead them towards the wrong goals and because of it people will take more time to reach their enlightenment through those paths. In fact, in this book I will try to show the original understanding of some of the founders of religions, which contradicts with the current views of their followers.

I have also provided detailed criticism of atheistic science so that readers should understand that science is also as faulty as any other path. I have mentioned two completely new concepts in science that we usually never hear about. One is Intelligent Design Movement, which is gaining popularity in west, and another is "Hard problem of Consciousness" which has caused major split in scientists these days. I have used some readymade data and copied it here because I am not trained in scientific language, so I thought it is better to use language of other experts to put the points clearly.

In the beginning, this book is a very serious debate on various philosophies. So people who are not interested in different philosophies and science can avoid this whole subject and go directly to the section of method from Vedānta, but I will request you to read this book from beginning to end at least once, because it will help you to stand firm and do the following sādhanā. All of this debate is written in this book to help new comers in Vedānta to be confident about it, so that they do not get disturbed by the criticism of people from other philosophical backgrounds. In this book, I have chosen most logical path of Advaita Vedānta as ideal path and I follow it in my day-to-day life as described in this book. As per my understanding, I do not think other paths are right. There may be people of different faiths (like Jains or Buddhists) who think their path is right then I have nothing to say about it. I believe one can reach peace of mind through various ways and for some people Buddhism and Jainism can be their way (to attain peace). But the people, who think that the sādhanā which I have mentioned in this book is right for them, can continue doing this sādhanā without any hesitation because I have used the most sophisticated logic and reason that is invented until now to reach the goal of Ātmadnyāna (Enlightenment) which is the most useful and straight way to attain permanent peace and live life happily.

Though this book talks about Vedānta, still it can also be useful for all people regardless of religion and faith. In today's world of democracy and equality it is not possible to follow Vedānta as it was used to be in past. We have to take positive aspects of it, the sharp logic that is used in it and leave other outdated concepts behind. I am confident that by reading this book all people of various backgrounds can be benefitted. People who already have good understanding of enlightenment will find this book as rehearsal of their early days. People, who are new, will find some good reasons to follow the path of Advaita so that they can decide what is best for them. In addition, materialist reductionists can find some points to debate on, which will help them to sharpen their logic.

In next chapter we are going to discuss views of different philosophies about Consciousness, which will help us to understand Consciousness more accurately.

Back to Top

### Chapter Two: - Views about Consciousness

In our day-to-day life we come across situations when we find life is not behaving right with us. Somebody is born in a place where everything is easily available and I may not have even necessary arrangements to live life. Somebody can complete his studies very easily and can choose the right career for him and I may not be able to even decide what to study and where to take admissions, and if I somehow decide then I may not get admission to right course because of many reasons including reservations, lack of money, lack of marks etc. The same thing continues and someone finds a good life partner (at least it looks from outside) and I may not find any life partner. Someone becomes successful in business and lives a life full of abundance and I may never become successful in any kind of business no matter how sincerely I conduct the business. Most disturbing thing happens when I see someone who is not behaving according to law or morality and becoming more and more successful without any difficulty. Also in the last stage of life, in old age someone lives happily with his family and I may have to spend life in old age home remembering the company of my dear ones that I had in past. In the end at the time of death someone dies without any pain in complete unconsciousness and I may have to go through the painful process of death. Looking at such situations one becomes depressed and thinks life as a cruel joke played by some cruel unknown power.

Good thing is, life is not any joke (can be a joke to a person with full understanding and he can laugh with life), and the power that takes care of life is not at all cruel. Different religions of all over the world have tried to investigate about the cause of the conditions of life. They have come up with different theories about God and his creation, some have become atheists, and some are still trying to understand through scientific methods. Below I am going to mention different views that incorporate almost all views of world about God or Consciousness that operates this world.

What is Consciousness?

When I talk with people about Consciousness then I find there is a great misunderstanding in their mind. Some people think mind as consciousness, some think sensations of body as consciousness, and some think faculties of body-mind as consciousness and so on. In this book I will try to clarify the exact meaning of Consciousness. Above I mentioned that people of different religions have invented different theories about God and His creation but when we want to do inquiry about God or Īśvara, creation and causes of life then it is important to know that we have to do inquiry about Consciousness (the sense of "I") because that is the essence of our being, without Consciousness we are dead. If we leave consciousness aside and start investigating then we are not going to reach anywhere, because without consciousness what is left is inert matter, which cannot operate on its own. Blind material forces do not have enough foresight to design a world where millions of species will inhabit and live with each other. The purposeful design of this world indicates towards an intelligent cause behind it. We have to put intelligence before the creation of this world, while world exist and when it ends. Consciousness that we have and Consciousness that operates the world, both have same qualities.

Therefore, fundamental question is what is intelligence/Consciousness? In India, our whole thought goes around this question and answer has come to us in many forms. Below we will look at different thoughts that emerged in India and later we will discuss about the modern science.

There are two major groups one is Atheist and second is Theist. Here one important point has to be understood that we are talking about Indian philosophy and in India Atheists are the people who do not accept Īśvara and Veda-s (mainly Veda-s, because somebody may not believe in personal God but believe in Vedas and he becomes eligible to be called as Theist), theists are the people who accept Vedas as authentic scriptures leading towards knowledge. However they may not believe in Īśvara. Atheist group consists of Chārvāka, Buddhist, Jaina and Ājīvaka (now extinct). Chārvāka thought is extreme atheistic, which says that there is neither Īśvara nor Jīva independent from matter. Buddhists are little less atheist, they also not believe in Īśvara and independent Jīva but they believe in rebirth of Vidnyāna (momentary Consciousness) and it's Nirvāna from the cycle of birth and death. Buddhists are also against Veda-s. Jaina-s believe in Jīva (personal Consciousness) and their rebirth as well as Moksha but they do not believe in Īśvara, Veda-s and call Jīva as equivalent to body which resides inside body. The last of this group Ājīvaka believes (used to believe in past, because there are no more followers of this cult) in God and Soul but they do not believe in Veda-s rather they say that neither the rule of Karma nor the free will drives our lives, but, it is a force called Niyati that drives our lives. Any authentic text of Ājīvaka is not available today because all of them are extinct now therefore the views I have put here about the philosophy of Ājīvaka are also not authentic. Main reason is said that Samrāta Aśoka after accepting the Buddha Dharma, ordered killing of all followers of Ājīvaka doctrine who were opponents of Buddha. Nearly 18000 followers of Ājīvaka were massacred on the order of Aśoka.

The theistic group consists mainly of Yoga, Sānkhya, Vaiśeshika, Nyāya, Pūrva Mimānsā and last is Uttar Mimānsā or Vedānta. The founders of these schools are considered to be Patanjali of Yoga, Kapila of Sānkhya, Kanāda of Vaiśeshika, Gautama of Nyāya, Jaimini of Pūrva Mimānsa and Vyāsa of Vedānta. All these people accept Veda-s as final authority to know the truth; however, they define Veda-s in different ways. Below we will discuss Atheist group in brief.

Chārwāka or Lokāyata

This is the most primitive thought about God or Consciousness. This thought suggests that Consciousness is nothing but the material forces and body itself. There is nothing more to search about. People believe that Bruhaspati, the Perceptor of Deva-s (Angels), taught this wrong philosophy to Asura-s (Demons) to delude them from right path of life. A saying became popular after this thought "Yāvat jīvet sukham jīvet, runam krutvā ghrutam pibet, bhasmibhūtasya dehasya punarāgamanam kutah". It means, enjoy life in all possible means, do not hesitate even to do debt for enjoyments because there is no coming back for the body which becomes ashes after death and hence we do not need to worry about repaying the debts. According to this philosophy body gives birth to Consciousness and when body stops working, Consciousness of that body is destroyed forever similarly this world is also operated by material forces and not any Consciousness or God. (It is like saying moon illumines the sun and when moon is absent sun disappears). Chārwāka thought that there are four basic elements; earth, water, fire and air, which are directly perceptible, are the cause of the Universe. They do not accept existence of the fifth element, space, because they cannot perceive it.

This thought could not spread in India and today also because of the charm of science very few so called intellectual people get attracted towards this kind of thinking.

Buddhist

This school of philosophy is very rich in terms of thoughts. People think that Gautama Buddha was the founder of this school but it seems that there were many Buddha-s before Gautama, who also promoted this ideology, because we find arguments against Buddhist views in Brahmasūtra and Brahmasūtra's reference is given in Bhagawad Gītā, it means that Brahmasūtra was written before Gītā and refusal of Buddhist ideology in Brahmasūtra suggests that this thought was there before Lord Krushna's time. Evidence suggests that Lord Krushna lived on this earth before Gautama Buddha. So we can easily conclude that thought of Buddhism was there from very time of Upanishads. Texts of Advaita Vedanta like Vedāntasāra of Sadānanda Yogindra Saraswati suggest that Buddhist thought originated from Chāndogya Upanishad (Vedāntasāra 131), but in the flow of time Buddhism cut itself from Upanishads.

After few centuries of the death of Gautama Buddha, this ideology was split in two opposing ideas, Theravāda or Hīnayāna and Mahāyāna. Theravāda spread in southern part of Asia (Sri Lanka, Laos, Burma, Thailand, Cambodia) and Mahāyāna spread in Northern and eastern part of Asia (Tibet, China, Japan, Korea, Singapore, Vietnam). The ideology of Buddhism could not survive in India, its birth place; because they were defeated in philosophical debates by Hindus and there monasteries were destroyed by Muslim invaders. However, Hindus accepted Gautam Buddha as ninth incarnation of Lord Vishnu, who took birth in Kaliyuga.

Theravāda: - This school in Buddhism does not accept any idea of independent Consciousness but it accepts relative reality of Consciousness. That means Consciousness emerges out of continuously changing atoms of matter.

Mahāyāna: - Mādhyamaka School of this tradition does not accept Consciousness and calls everything as empty or Śūnya. Yogāchāra school of Mahāyāna accepts that only Consciousness (ego) is real and everything else is false. According to this school emptiness is the absence of perceiver and perceived. Yogāchāra branch is almost like Vedānta School of Hindu philosophy, but they think Consciousness having momentary existence and everything else is imagination of that momentary Consciousness. It is like solipsism where ego is the creator of the non-ego. (While Vedānta tries to prove Consciousness as ultimate reality and non-changing, according to Vedānta ego and non-ego both appear simultaneously).

Jaina

This is very ancient ideology. Origins of this thought are not known to me. Jaina accepts soul independent than matter but it is caught in the matter. When karma gets exhausted soul gets liberated from matter. According to this philosophy, we can have direct and right knowledge of reality only after liberation. Until then we can describe any object in seven ways, it is the main principle of Jaina philosophy, it is called as syādavāda. According to the theory of syādavāda, we can think about any object in seven different ways, they are -

i)Syādasti – it is possible that it (object) may exist

ii)Syānnāsti – it is possible that it may not exist

iii)Syādasti cha syānnāsti cha – it is possible that it may exist and may not exist.

iv)Syādavaktavyam - it is possible that it may be inexpressible.

v)Syādasti cha avaktavyam cha - it is possible that it may exist and may be inexpressible.

vi)Syānnāsti cha avaktavyam cha - it is possible that it may not exist and may be inexpressible.

vii)Syādasti cha nāsti cha avaktavyam cha - it is possible that it may exist; it may not exist and may be inexpressible.

Now we will look at the Theist thoughts.

Sānkhya

This school of thought was invented by Kapila. He is said to be the incarnation of Lord Vishnu (it is disputed). This school accepts two fundamental tattva (entities). First is Purusha (Consciousness) and second is Prakruti (Matter), hence this school is a dualistic school; Sānkhya also admits plurality of souls. Here Purusha (one meaning of this word is "male") does not indicate any sex but the pure Consciousness. Prakruti is another substance along with Purusha , which is made up of three Guna-s (qualities), Sattva, Raja and Tama. When Sattva Guna increases in prakruti it gives birth to the Universe, and animate and inanimate things in it. But in this game of Prakruti, the Purusha gets caught and starts thinking that he is the doer of Karma. Because of this notion, Purusha gets caught in the cycle of birth and death. This was a very popular school. Bādarayana Vyāsa as well as Ādi Śankarāchārya had to use a very large portion of Brahmasūtra to refute this school.

But the question emerges why did Ādi Śankarāchārya refuted this thought which was proposed by an incarnation of Lord Vishnu (there is divide of opinion about Kapila, some say that there were two people named Kapila, one of them promoted the atheist thought of sānkhya and another who was the incarnation of Lord Vishnu promoted theist thoughts).

Basically Sānkhya was a dualist thought, and duality is not acceptable to Upanishads. Another reason is, this thought was caught in the hands of atheists, and they used it as a weapon against theists. Sānkhya philosophy is not materialist but it seems that there is no role for the will of intelligent agent (Īśvara) in the idea of inert pradhāna (prakruti) and three Guna. Therefore, this thought was refuted by the proponents of Vedānta. However, it seems that Śankarāchārya and lord Krushna himself has used some of the ideas of this school in their philosophy.

Nyāya and Vaiśeshika

I have combined these two because they are combined in reality. Both emerged differently but in the course of time got combined with each other. Between these two Nyāya is the older school. The most important factor of Nyāya is that it tried to prove the existence of Īśvara (God) through logic in response to Buddhism. Later this school was merged with Vaiśeshika. Vaiśeshika School was founded by Kanāda. Kanāda word is derived from word Kana, which means atom. This whole philosophy was based on the idea of atoms of matter coming together and giving birth to this universe. Both these schools proposed existence of extra-cosmic God who creates, maintains and destroys this Universe and both of them agreed on the plurality of souls. Major difference between these schools and Advaita Vedānta is, these schools accept duality and Advaita does not accept duality. However, the thoughts of Nyāya School are accepted by Advaita from the stand point of Transactional Reality. We don't need to go in depth of these thoughts because they no more exists in India and in current days modern Physics is almost like these thought so we will discuss this issue when we discuss about modern science later in this book. However, modern science has gone beyond their own stand of atoms as fundamental entities and now science talks about quantum physics and is trying to investigate even inside the subatomic particles.

Yoga

This school of thought is based on the Sānkhya ideology but the founder of this thought Maharshi Patanjali has added some practical exercises and rules in this thought to reach the ultimate goal. This school accepts Īśvara unlike the Sānkhya. But major difference in this school and Vedānta is that Maharshi Patanjali uses Īśvara pranidhāna or Bhakti as a method to reach emancipation and it is not a necessity. Further Yoga assumes that there is real bondage which has to be removed by taking action to make the mind quiet and to achieve nirvikalpa samādhi; this kind of thinking gives rise to duality. Because if we think that peace can be attained only in samādhi then there arise two states, one which is samādhi and second which is not samādhi. Further, the idea of liberation through action gives an atheist shade to this philosophy and therefore, it is refuted by Śankarāchārya and Dnyāneśvara mahārāja (from Maharashtra). But as with other important schools, Vedāntins have used some of the features (at least names of the features) of this thought as sādhanā to help realize the ultimate truth.

Pūrva Mimānsaka

The meaning of the word Mimānsā is analysis about the real meaning of the Veda-s. This philosophy accepted that soul exists but said that the liberation of soul is possible only through Karma (work as ascribed in scriptures). We should do good deeds and yadnya (rituals) here in this mrutyuloka (earth) and after death go to heaven. If we do not behave according to śāstra (Scriptures) then we will be thrown into hell. But they did not believe that heavens or hells are eternal rather they said that after enjoying the fruits of good deeds or after finishing the punishment for sins we will come back to the earth to do more good or bad karma and enjoy it's fruits. If one wants liberation from this cycle of birth and death then he has to wait until death, after completing the right work throughout life one can realize Consciousness after death and become free. Few of the followers of this thought do not accept the existence of Īśvara.

Śankarāchārya has refuted this thought also because it contradicted with the basic idea of Upanishads which is "śrunvantu viśve amrutasya putrāh āye dhāmāni divyāni tasthu. Vedāham etam Purusham mahantam āditya varnam tamsah parastāt, tameva viditvā atimrutyumeti nānyah panthāh vidyate ayanāy" This thought of Upanishad suggests that it is possible to go beyond the birth and death by knowing the Ādityavarna Purushah. It means knowledge (Dnyāna) and not the Karma is the means of liberation. Currently there are few followers of this school who believe that they will do yadnya and enjoy its fruits in heaven.

Uttar Mimānsa or Vedānta

This is the most sophisticated thought in Indian philosophies, as I know. It is called as Vedānta, which means the end or the goal of Vedas. This thought was there from very early times but it was ādi Śankarāchārya, who spread this thought (Advaita Vedānta) in India and during this process he refuted so many contradicting thoughts to put Vedānta on the top of them. Śankarāchārya's detailed work can be read in his commentary on Brahmasūtra and in Śankar Digvijaya. He refuted Jaina, Buddhist, Chārvāka, Sānkhya, Yoga, Pāśupata and even Bhāgawat ideologies.

In Vedanta, there are again six major branches. Advaita (ādi Śankarāchārya), Viśishta Advaita (Ramānuja ācharya), Dvaita (Mādhavāchārya), Dvait-Advaita (Nimbārkāchārya), Śuddha Advaita (Vallabhāchārya) and last is Achintya Bhedābheda (Chaitanya Mahāprabhu). In this book, I will talk about Advaita Vedānta of ādi Śankarāchārya.

Advaita Vedānta accepts impersonal Brahman as the ultimate goal of manifested beings but also accepts major role of Īśvara in the whole process. Īśvara helps us to get out from the bandhan (bondage) of Karma. We, on our own cannot be free from past Karma (Sanchita) which is infinite. Karma is divided in three major parts. One is Sanchita Karma, which is the sum of all our Karma we did from unknown past; it is infinite because while living we are continuously gathering karma into it. Second kind of Karma is Prārabdha, which we bring with us from sanchita to fulfill in current life. Third kind of Karma is Kriyamāna, which we accumulate during the process of fulfilling prārabdha, this Kriyamāna karma gathers in Sanchita. This is a vicious unending cycle of sanchita to prārabdha to Kriyamāna and again back to sanchita.

Īśvara (who is not any person in Vedānta but the Consciousness of the Universe) helps us to come out of this cycle by taking us to Real Guru and Guru explains us the knowledge of Self, and the nature of bondage which is imaginary, this knowledge directly takes us beyond the personality that was caught in the cycle, and we realize that we are already free.

Above we have seen different Philosophies in India. Now we will look at the different concepts of Moksha (liberation) that they have.

Different concepts of Moksha

First, if we look at Chārvāka, for them death is the Moksha (liberation from samsāra) because nothing is left to be caught in the cycle of birth and death or the cycle of karma.

For Buddhists, Nirvāna is Moksha. Nirvāna literally means non attachment with anything or having no desire of anything. It blocks the process of Vidnyāna being born again into new womb to complete the karma. They think that after reaching to this state of non-attachment, the consciousness or Vidnyāna becomes śūnya or is destroyed forever (some Buddhists scholars do not agree with this definition of Nirvāna, but if we accept the idea of momentary existence then getting destroyed forever is the only possible meaning of Nirvāna).

For Jains, becoming free from the bonds of matter is Moksha. They think that soul, which is caught in material energies from eternity in past can become free and eternally sit on siddhaśīla. They suggest, to reach Moksha we must completely exhaust our Karma because it is the Karma that binds the Soul with matter.

For Sānkhya and Yoga the moksha is like Jaina-s, when Purusha gets departed from prakruti's three Guna and remains in itself. But for that matter they don't suggest the exhaustion of Karma. In their opinion means of Moksha is Sādhanā described in Patanjali Sūtra-s and ultimately reaching to Samādhi.

Moksha has different meanings for different schools of Vedāntins also. Broadly Advaita and Dvaita are the main two schools. Dvaita schools believe, to live with Īśvara for eternity is moksha. However, for Advaita School the Moksha is realization of this world as Māyā and Mithyā, which does not have independent existence other than Brahman and living life according to the will of Īśvara in the understanding that Consciousness is always free and the bondage is imaginary.

Back to Top

Chapter Three: - Critique of Atheistic Science.

Atheistic Science

This is a very vast subject but I am going to discuss few basic problems which modern science has. Somebody may ask why look at problems; why not look at positive factor of science? The answer is we have to look at problems because there are really serious problems with the ideology of atheistic science as a whole. Positive factors are already in front of us as technological advances.

When the era of modern science started in west, majority of scientists (like Darwin, Newton etc.) were Theists. They believed in God and while doing experiments they had in mind that they are exploring the creation that God has created. However, later science was hijacked by the people who were having Materialist ideology (like Chārwāka school in ancient India), thanks to the Evolution Theory proposed by Darwin (Darwin himself was a theist). This theory proved to be a perfect weapon in the hands of materialist atheists to takeover science and spread their views. The peak was reached in 1953 when two scientists named Urey and Miller declared that they were able to create building blocks of life (amino acids) in the laboratory. This led people to think that since scientists are creating life in labs then now there is no need for us to believe in God, because life was (is) the most mysterious thing on earth and materialists had (have) no explanation for it. But with Urey-Miller experiment, they did a widespread propaganda that now there is no need to believe in God.

We shall deeply look into matter now, because the experiment of Urey and Miller was later proved to be a major setback for evolution theory. Scientists took for granted that on primordial earth, there was no Oxygen in the environment and they used Methane for their experiment, but later it was discovered that Oxygen was there in the Environment and this fact put a full stop on that experiment because the amino acids which they discovered cannot sustain in environment with oxygen.

But still if we assume that the Urey-Miller experiment as a success, then also more than sixty years have been passed since then and there is no progress more than discovering amino acids. We have to understand that though amino acids can be called as building blocks of life still they are not life. As bricks we use, to build a house, are building blocks of house but still they are not house, we have to arrange them in a way that they form a house and to do that we need intelligent designer. In the same way amino acids also need intelligent designer to form life.

Biggest hurdle for Materialist Evolutionists

As science progressed it was discovered that DNA is the most essential part of life, because DNA carries all information to form proteins, living cell and the whole living system. In the time of Darwin there was no idea of DNA. This DNA has become an impossible riddle for evolutionists to solve because there is not a single spontaneous generation from chemicals to life, which can give birth to such biological code. Scientists argue that mutations in species can cause evolution but in real life all mutations cause loss of information in genes and don't add information to form new creatures. If evolution has to happen, there has to be addition in information in DNA that can cause evolution of different species.

Further, it is almost impossible to decide which was formed first, the DNA, or proteins, because they both rely on each other for their existence. This question has become a riddle like the question of chicken and egg, what is first the chicken or egg.

Some scientists have come up with another idea that we should consider the RNA as the first unit of life because they have found that RNA can self-replicate. But it is almost impossible to know how the RNA was formed first because the scientists who discovered the self-replication of RNA had used an already formed RNA for their experiment.

Another strange logic, which evolutionists postulate is, if life can be created artificially in labs, that means life could have emerged naturally given the right conditions. This logic is wrong because we don't say that if airplanes can be created artificially with our intelligence then they can emerge naturally also without any intelligence, just by natural selection or by chance. We don't see anything like that happening anywhere in the universe.

Panspermia

Some materialist scientists who do not agree with evolution have come out with a new idea. This idea is, life might have come to earth from outer space. They found some traces of amino acids on meteors. So they concluded that it is possible that life was there in the space and it came to earth riding on meteorites. This is called as Panspermia. However, there is another view in panspermia also; some people suggest that aliens brought life to earth in their space ships. There are so many places on earth like huge pyramids and other ancient structures whose cause is yet unknown to us. Therefore, some people use them as proofs of aliens visiting earth in ancient times and they could have brought life on this planet. This view is called as Directed Panspermia.

Problem with this theory is if it is almost certain that life could not have emerged on earth then how it emerged on some distant planet, because rules of life are same everywhere in the Universe. If life can't emerge out of matter here on earth then how could it emerge there on some another planet and evolution of aliens happened? This theory of panspermia is nothing but an attempt to avoid the embarrassment of materialists for some time. What then, does all this logic suggest that I am against the science and progress? The answer to this question is absolutely not; in fact I am in favor of science and progress on this physical plane so that we can go beyond it with contentment. But while doing so we have to take two sides of science into consideration.

Two sides of science

1) Operational (Experimental) Science - Operational science involves discovering how things operate in today's Creation — repeatable and observable phenomena in the present. This is the science of Newton and Einstein. Operational science involves experimentation in the here and now. Studying how an organism operates (DNA, mutations, reproduction, natural selection etc.) does not tell us how it came into existence in the first place.

2) Historical (Forensic) Science – Forensic science deals with the origin of things in the past—unique, unrepeatable, unobservable events. Origins science deals with how something came into existence in the past and so is not open to experimental verification / observation (unless someone invents a 'time machine' to travel back into the past to observe). We can assume that it is more a guesswork than science.

I am in favor of Operational science which is helpful in discovering new drugs, new technologies. But forensic science is difficult to confirm. Materialist people are unnecessarily using it as a tool to spread their view. I am certainly against it.

Artificial Intelligence

Artificial intelligence is a part of operational science. The invention of electricity and computers has given us this marvelous tool to make our life easier. Artificial intelligence can sometimes prove more intelligent than our real human intelligence. And this very fact causes some people to think that since we can now produce artificial intelligence then there is no need to assume that there is something like real intelligence. So we shall look into this matter in detail.

We are trying to imitate real intelligence. First we have to know what real intelligence is. It is the Consciousness (relatively) inside body who thinks, who has emotions, who has free will (in relative sense), who is in reality the life force.

On the other hand, computers (robots) are machines which obey the orders given by humans. Computers do not have emotions and if they show some emotions then that is because they are programmed by humans to react on certain situations. Without consciousness, it is impossible for anything to have emotions and free will. If at some time in future scientists invent any method to connect computers with real consciousness then computers may have capabilities like living beings. People usually do not understand that Artificial Intelligence is an effort to imitate the real intelligence. No matter how sophisticated it is, still it is artificial, mimicry of real. It is just trying to show that it works like real intelligence but there is vast difference between real biological process and mathematical process that takes place in computers. In reality Consciousness has ability to remember, Consciousness has ability to reason, Consciousness is aware of body and mind. Consciousness uses the biological machine of body. Without Consciousness, body is matter without any ability mentioned above. Some people argue that there is no proof of soul or Consciousness; we only have subjective first person experience of Consciousness. But this is not true, soul or Consciousness is already proved, if one looks deeply. Consciousness or soul is the thing that operates body, without it body becomes dead. Now if somebody thinks that chemical processes in body cause Consciousness then he will have to prove it by bringing a dead body back to life by injecting some chemicals in it. Otherwise, it is just wishful thinking of materialist, because if somebody knows that Consciousness in body is caused by chemicals then he should be able to demonstrate how it happens, if such person gives promise of future then his very conclusion that chemicals cause Consciousness becomes wrong scientifically, because according to scientific thought no one should come to any conclusion without successfully inspecting and experimenting. Anybody must come to any conclusion after being able to prove it with scientific methods, which include reproducing the same effect. More difference in physical processes and consciousness will be discussed in "Hard Problem of Consciousness" later.

Intelligent Design Movement

After massive onslaught of materialist worldview some scientists who don't agree with them have come out with a theory which is closer to theism. This theory is getting famous day by day that's why it is called as a movement against mainstream paradigm of materialist scientists.

What this theory suggests is some features of this universe are best explained by design rather than chance or natural selection. These theorists don't claim to know the designer or his motives but they simply accept based on our (their) knowledge that design is the best possible explanation for the life around us.

Though this is supposed to be a new theory, however, its roots go deeper into western thought. I am mentioning here western thought because in east we have always accepted that world is "created" by God. There were few people who tried to spread atheism but they could never succeed in their attempt on the scale like they succeeded in west because of the theory of Darwin. Atheism is more popular in west so I am mentioning some scientists from there. I was telling that roots of intelligent design theory go deeper in west. Plato and Aristotle had agreed on this. In modern era, cosmologist Fred Hoyle in 1982 mentioned unless a person is "deflected by a fear of incurring the wrath of scientific opinion, one arrives at the conclusion that biomaterials with their amazing measure of order must be the outcome of intelligent design." Another argument came forward from chemist Michael Polanyi that information in DNA could not be reduced to physics and chemistry and something more was needed. In 1984 Charles B. Thaxton, Walter L. Bradley and Roger L. Olsen published The Mystery of Life's Origin and criticized the idea that unguided natural selection process produced first living cell abiotically from non-living materials. They tried to distinguish between orders (found in crystals) complexities (found in mixtures of molecules) and specified complexity (information rich complexity found in DNA). Here their argument is we need to identify in the present an abiotic cause of specified complexity, rather we find evidence in the present that intelligent investigator can create complex chemical synthesis which itself is an evidence for DNA might also have created by intelligent agent in past. In following year 1985 molecular biologist Michael Denton published Evolution: A Theory in Crisis which criticized Darwin.

This kind of criticism and advocating the intelligent design theory is continuing undisturbed till now. Darwin, in The Origin of species wrote "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down." In other words it means organ which contains irreducible complexity. Irreducible complexity means a single system which has several parts that contribute to the basic part, if we remove one single part then that system fails. Scientists describe several features of human cells, light sensing mechanism of human eyes, human blood clotting system are just a few examples which are irreducible complex.

In 1998 mathematician and philosopher William A. Dembski formalized a criterion for accepting something as intelligent design. He proposed that there are only three ways of explaining anything around us; they are regularity (natural low), chance and lastly design. He called these three as Explanatory filter. He says if we can explain an event in terms of regularity then chance and design are already excluded. In the same way if we can explain something as chance then design is automatically excluded. But if we can't explain by regularity and by "chance" then only option left is design. He says it is very easy to rule out regularity relative to chance. But it is difficult to rule out chance in terms of complexity if somebody wants to infer design. He gives the example that if there are several dozens of letters then it is possible that we find the word "it" lying somewhere in them. Such easy complex word is not enough to suggest that it has intelligence behind it. He sets another filter to rule out chance as number of probability found some chance should not exceed the number of elementary particles in the universe times the number of seconds in the big bang times the rate of transitions from one physical state to another. He arrives at the number of 10150. Thus he mentions if there is less probability of occurring of an event than 10150 then we have to conclude that it can't happen by chance.

However, in reality the above logic is not always useful so he proposed another filter of "specificity". This as I understand is some purpose behind the occurrence of a system. So as per Dembski if a system is able to pass all these filters then we have to accept that it is designed.

Geologists Stephen Meyer further mentions that DNA carries information like meaningful English sentences. He therefore mentions that as the information contained in English sentences or in the computer program is not derived from the chemistry of ink or from the physics of magnetism, in same way information in DNA transcends the properties of its material medium. So this information is not due to natural law or regularity. Since a typical gene contains hundreds of such subunits, and organisms contain hundreds of genes, the information carried in an organism's DNA is extremely complex. Furthermore, a living cell needs not just any DNA, but DNA that encodes functional proteins. To be functional, a protein must have a very specific sequence, so the information in DNA is not only contingent and complex, but also specified. Therefore Meyer concludes that we know from our experience that all information is produced by intelligent agents and not by unintelligent chance, then intelligent design is the best explanation of information in cells.

Intelligent design scientists use Cambrian Explosion as a classic case of intelligent design when different species of animals appeared on earth in a very short period relatively. They suggest that the blind forces of natural selection and chance don't have such foresight to develop species rapidly to fulfilling the various goals which seem to be decided before the species are created. For example animals in lower class of food chain are seem to be designed to be pray of predators which are on the higher ladder of food chain. Everything in the nature is well designed and its role seems to be defined before its creation.

Some ID (Intelligent Design) proponents not only see design in living things but also propose that the universe as a whole is also a fine tuned design. Because of the views of ID proponents, materialists' scientists blame them as disguised Christian Creationists who want to promote their religious ideas in society. But ID proponents reject this claim saying that they only propose that this universe is intelligently designed and don't claim anything about the nature and ideas of the creator.

The debate continues and it seems that it will continue in future also. There were attempts to include ID in public schools in USA. But because of the majority of materialists these attempts were failed. Nevertheless, it is also true that ID is gaining popularity in scientists that creationism used to have in the past.

God-of-gaps argument

Some atheists or materialists argue that all arguments from theists are based on the gaps in scientific knowledge. One-day science will fill these gaps and theism will be disproved. It is true to a certain extent. In past people used to refer to God for the incidents in nature but later they were explained (in relative terms) by science. This is why atheists argue that theism seems to rest on famously known as "argument from ignorance". But on the other hand it is also true that all arguments from theists are not based on ignorance; rather there is enough evidence that they are based on knowledge that's why it is impossible for science, which is also knowledge, to refute knowledge based arguments of theists. A mathematician from Oxford University, John Lenox writes in his book "God's Undertaker. Has science buried God?" –

"How does one scientifically recognize a message emanating from an intelligent source, and distinguish it from the random background noise that emanates from the cosmos? Clearly the only way this can be done is to compare the signals received with the patterns specified in advance that are deemed to be clear and reliable indicators of intelligence — like a long sequence of prime numbers — and then to make a design inference. In SETI [The Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence, which was originally a NASA program] the recognition of intelligent agency is regarded as lying within the legitimate scope of natural science. The astronomer Carl Sagan thought that a single message from space would be enough to convince us that there were intelligences in the universe other than our own."

"Writing on paper (or paint on a Rembrandt canvas) exhibits what philosopher Del Ratzsch calls counter flow — phenomena that nature, unaided by agent activity, could not produce. It is because we know that, even in principle, physics and chemistry cannot give an explanation of the counter flow exhibited by the writing, that we reject a purely naturalistic explanation, and we postulate an author. But it needs to be said that postulating an intelligent agent to explain writing is not falling into an 'author-of-the-gaps' syndrome; rather it is our knowledge of the nature of the 'gap' that demands we postulate an author."

Scientists' Quotes about God

Below I am quoting scientists who believe in God:

1) "I have looked into most philosophical systems and I have seen that none will work without God."

"Science is incompetent to reason upon the creation of matter itself out of nothing. We have reached the utmost limit of our thinking faculties when we have admitted that because matter cannot be eternal and self-existent it must have been created."

–Physicist and mathematician James Clerk Maxwell, who is credited with formulating classical electromagnetic theory and whose contributions to science are considered to be of the same magnitude to those of Einstein and Newton.

2) "For myself, faith begins with a realization that a supreme intelligence brought the universe into being and created man. It is not difficult for me to have this faith, for it is incontrovertible that where there is a plan there is intelligence — an orderly, unfolding universe testifies to the truth of the most majestic statement ever uttered—-'In the beginning God.'

–Nobel Prize winning physicist Arthur Compton, discoverer of the Compton Effect.

3) "Those who say that the study of science makes a man an atheist must be rather silly."

"Something which is against natural laws seems to me rather out of the question because it would be a depressive idea about God. It would make God smaller than he must be assumed. When he stated that these laws hold, then they hold, and he wouldn't make exceptions. This is too human an idea. Humans do such things, but not God."

–Nobel Prize winning physicist Max Born, who was instrumental in the development of quantum mechanics.

4) "The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you."

"In the history of science, ever since the famous trial of Galileo, it has repeatedly been claimed that scientific truth cannot be reconciled with the religious interpretation of the world. Although I am now convinced that scientific truth is unassailable in its own field, I have never found it possible to dismiss the content of religious thinking as simply part of an outmoded phase in the consciousness of mankind, a part we shall have to give up from now on. Thus in the course of my life I have repeatedly been compelled to ponder on the relationship of these two regions of thought, for I have never been able to doubt the reality of that to which they point."

–Werner Heisenberg, who was awarded the 1932 Nobel Prize in Physics for the creation of quantum mechanics

5) "I'm not an atheist, and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God."

"The more I study science, the more I believe in God."

"I want to know how God created this world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon. I want to know his thoughts; the rest are details."

"Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe–a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble."

–Albert Einstein

6) "Another source of conviction in the existence of God, connected with the reason and not with the feelings, impresses me as having much more weight. This follows from the extreme difficulty or rather impossibility of conceiving this immense and wonderful universe, including man with his capacity of looking far backwards and far into futurity, as the result of blind chance or necessity. When thus reflecting I feel compelled to look to a First Cause having an intelligent mind in some degree analogous to that of man; and I deserve to be called a Theist."

–Charles Darwin, the founder of evolutionary biology, as

quoted in his autobiography.

7) "There is for me powerful evidence that there is something going on behind it all. It seems as though somebody has fine-tuned nature's numbers to make the Universe. The impression of design is overwhelming."

–Physicist Paul Davies

8) "When confronted with the order and beauty of the universe and the strange coincidences of nature, it's very tempting to take the leap of faith from science into religion. I am sure many physicists want to. I only wish they would admit it."

–Physicist Tony Rothman, former post-doctoral fellow at Oxford University

9) "I think only an idiot can be an atheist. We must admit that there exists an incomprehensible power or force with limitless foresight and knowledge that started the whole universe going in the first place."

–Christian Anfinsen, winner of the 1972 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for his work on ribonucleic.

10) "Astronomy leads us to a unique event, a universe which was created out of nothing, and delicately balanced to provide exactly the conditions required to support life. In the absence of an absurdly improbable accident, the observations of modern science seem to suggest an underlying, one might say, supernatural plan."

–Arno Penzias, winner of the 1978 Nobel Prize in Physics.

11) "If we need an atheist for a debate, we go to the philosophy department. The physics department isn't much use."

–Robert Griffiths, winner of the Heinemann Prize in mathematical physics.

12) "It should now be clear that information, being a fundamental entity, cannot be a property of matter, and its origin cannot be explained in terms of material processes. We therefore formulate the following theorem. Theorem 1: The fundamental quantity of information is a non-material (mental) entity. It is not a property of matter, so that purely material processes are fundamentally precluded as sources of information."-

Information scientist Werner Gitt, a former director and professor at the German Federal Institute of Physics and Technology writes in his book In the Beginning Was Information

13) "In the New Story of science the whole universe–including matter, energy, space, and time–is a one-time event and had a definite beginning. But something must have always existed; for if ever absolutely nothing existed, then nothing would exist now, since nothing comes from nothing. The material universe cannot be the thing that always existed because matter had a beginning. It is 12 to 20 billion years old. This means that whatever has always existed is non-material. The only non-material reality seems to be mind. If mind is what has always existed, then matter must have been brought into existence by a mind that always was. This points to an intelligent, eternal being who created all things. Such a being is what we mean by the term God."-

Physicist George Stanciu and philosopher Robert Augros in book "The New Story of Science"

14) "It may seem bizarre, but in my opinion science offers a surer path to God than religion."

–Physicist Paul Davies, the winner of the 2001 Kelvin Medal issued by the Institute of Physics and the winner of the 2002 Faraday Prize issued by the Royal Society (amongst other awards), as cited in his book God and the New Physics.

15) "I regard this theory as being without foundation. The more we discover scientifically about the brain the more clearly do we distinguish between the brain events and the mental phenomena and the more wonderful do the mental phenomena become. Promissory materialism is simply a superstition held by dogmatic materialists. It has all the features of a Messianic prophecy, with the promise of a future freed of all problems - a kind of Nirvana for our unfortunate successors." (Eccles 1994). -JOHN ECCLES – NOBEL LAUREATE IN MEDICINE AND PHYSIOLOGY in his book How the Self Controls Its Brain (Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1994)

In his book Evolution of the Brain: Creation of the Self (London: Routledge, 1991), Eccles wrote: "I maintain that the human mystery is incredibly demeaned by scientific reductionism, with its claim in promissory materialism to account eventually for all of the spiritual world in terms of patterns of neuronal activity. This belief must be classed as a superstition.

We have to recognize that we are spiritual beings with souls existing in a spiritual world as well as material beings with bodies and brains existing in a material world." (Eccles 1991, 241).

16) "It has occurred to me lately—I must confess with some shock at first to my scientific sensibilities—that both questions [the origin of mind and the origin of life from nonliving matter] might be brought into some degree of congruence. This is with the assumption that mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality—the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff. It is mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create: science-, art-, and technology-making animals."-

The Nobel Prize winning Harvard University biologist George Wald in his address to the Quantum Biology Symposium

"A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question."

–Cambridge University astrophysicist and mathematician Fred Hoyle commenting on the incredible fine-tuning necessary for life to exist (as quoted in The Creator and the Cosmos by Hugh Ross).

Now we shall discuss the studies about Consciousness in science which have took place until now. Approach of materialist scientists towards the "Consciousness" was very hard, they used to avoid the whole subject saying that currently we don't have enough understanding of brain processes that cause consciousness so it is better to understand first how brain works and later we shall look at the consciousness. Some of them have come out with an idea that Consciousness is a byproduct of physical processes that take place in brain and it is not a reality but just a virtual presence of ego caused by firing of neurons.

This view got a major setback when some philosophers and scientists came with an idea of Hard problem.

The Hard Problem of Consciousness

David Chalmers, an Australian philosopher, coined this term "Hard Problem of Consciousness." He has characterized the research in the field of Consciousness in two categories First is The Easy problems of Consciousness & second is The Hard problem of Consciousness. Here it is important to mention that easy problems are easy relative to hard problem otherwise they are also very difficult and may take another one hundred years for us to solve.

Now we shall look at these two kinds separately. Easy problems are the problems, which can be solved once when we realize the neural mechanisms in our brains through the study of cognitive science. The hard problems are those problems, which seem difficult even if we completely understand the all neural structures of brain. I am giving some of the easy problems in Chalmers' words below.

• The ability to discriminate, categorize, and react to environmental stimuli;

• the integration of information by a cognitive system;

• the report ability of mental states;

• the ability of a system to access its own internal states;

• the focus of attention;

• the deliberate control of behavior;

• the difference between wakefulness and sleep.

All above listed things are possible when a person is conscious. It is said to be conscious when it is verbally reportable or ability to react on any stimuli or deliberate actions. All these are symptoms of Consciousness. It is possible to explain all these phenomena studying the neural networks of brain. If it was all the Consciousness has then Consciousness would not have been such a problem.

The really hard problem or The Hard Problem of Consciousness is the problem of EXPERIENCE. In words of Chalmers "It is undeniable that some organisms are subjects of experience. But the question of how it is that these systems are subjects of experience is perplexing. Why is it that when our cognitive systems engage in visual and auditory information-processing, we have visual or auditory experience: the quality of deep blue? How can we explain why there is something it is like to entertain a mental image, or to experience an emotion? It is widely agreed that experience arises from a physical basis, but we have no good explanation of why and how it so arises. Why should physical processing give rise to a rich inner life at all? It seems objectively unreasonable that it should, and yet it does. - Facing Up to the Problem of Consciousness"

This problem is also called as Explanatory Gap (The term "explanatory gap" was coined by Joseph Levine, a philosopher at North Carolina State University in "Materialism and Qualia: The Explanatory Gap" published in Pacific Philosophical Quarterly in 1983.The explanatory gap argument doesn't demonstrate a gap in nature, but a gap in our understanding of nature. What kind of gap is this? For example when scientists study about pain as a third person observing brain from outside of the brain then they can say that pain is firing of particular neurons (C fibers). It may be a valid explanation physiologically but still scientists cannot understand how pain feels. It is called Qualia. Qualia means "what it is like" or "how it feels" or in simple word "Awareness". This Qualia is the Hard Problem of Consciousness. Why this is hard because easy problems need explanation of cognitive abilities and functions but hard problem still remain untouched even after good advance in explaining all abilities and functions of brain that how and why these functions give birth to the CONSCIOUS EXPERIENCE? Efforts have been made all over the world to address this problem. Some materialists simply reject the claim that such problem exists. They say that it is enough to explain functions of brain and we get consciousness as virtual product of brain processes. These scientists are not much in numbers so we can reject their claim on the sheer basis of majority against them but we can put a strong argument against them also. If we assume that consciousness is derivative of brain then it is impossible for consciousness to work upon brain or body and it is a proven fact that we can work upon our body as per our free will (relative terms). If our brain generates the signal of hunger then it will be mandatory on us to follow the orders of brain and eat something if we are derivatives of brain. But it does not happen rather we can go on hunger strike until we die. This simple logic proves that Consciousness is the Owner of the brain and not vice versa. One more thing has to be considered that consciousness means deliberate control on behavior. This kind of control is present in all life forms, even in life forms who don't have brains or brain like structures (like trees, single celled life forms etc.). So consciousness is the result of brain process is not the right explanation, at the most we can say that brain facilitates Consciousness to perform complicated functions.

Some other scientists agree that there is problem but they give promise of future discoveries in the field of Neuroscience. It looks impressive but it is really useless argument because any science is based upon observation, experiment and at last Results of that experiments in terms of theory. But these days it seems that whole process is turned upside down by contemporary scientists. They have already declared results of their experiments on human brain in terms of materialism. They don't know how brain works but they claim that it is the processes of brain that give birth to consciousness. My request to such scientists will be first you do your experiments then claim anything, don't promise anything in future.

In the end we can conclude that whatever explanation scientists give the hard problem still remains a mystery.

Back to Top

### Chapter Four: - Secret Method of Vedānta

We have come to very important part of this book. So far we have discussed different spiritual paths and criticized materialist science. Until now it was a very serious and in some sense for some people, a boring debate. But it was necessary to create and sustain faith in Consciousness. If there is doubt about Consciousness in one's mind then it is very difficult even to study scriptures that contain information about God, doing any kind of Sādhanā, Bhakti and karma yoga are out of question. If someone thinks that he or she is a product of chemicals and appeared on this earth just out of chance then it is possible that such a person ultimately becomes suicidal and can harm society also. That's why it was necessary for me at least to show people that the debate is still going on and atheism has not won yet. So don't take everything that comes from the streets of scientists as ultimate truth. Scientists have their own hidden agenda of taking finances from society, if they say that they are unaware of truth then governments will not finance them on such large scale. In addition, it seems that there is concern to Governments that if it is accepted by scientists that God has created this world then society may drift into darkness of blind faiths and strange rituals. Therefore, governments keep providing support to atheistic views of scientists and evolution theory by hiding the drawbacks of this theory. Still we have to oppose atheism and say confidently at least on our individual level that God exists and He has created (from the stand point of Vyāvahārika Sattā) this world. We are not come into existence just by chance and just by blind natural selection process. We can easily see factors of design everywhere in this world and Universe. Some scientists argue that if the world is designed then it is not designed well, it is a poor design. They give examples of limbs in different animals, which seem to be there without any purpose. But these people have not understood life completely yet and it is very much possible that one day they will understand the purpose behind the limbs which seem useless today, it has already happened with some of the limbs in throat and in stomach of humans.

It is not possible to refute materialism completely if we have experience of only this physical world. It is absolutely necessary to experience the spiritual reality also (or understand that everything is spiritual). Some materialists suggest that spiritual experiences are outcomes of brain processes and there is no way to confirm that they are not so (because brain is the only instrument that we use in this world to experience anything). They suggest that experiences like dissolving into nothingness (nothingness here does not mean śūnya of Buddhism but absence of matter) is possible because our body awareness becomes dim resulting from some neurological effect in brain. To counter this kind of arguments, I have mentioned "Hard Problem of Consciousness" above, which asks a fundamental question that why there is any kind of experience in the first place; forget just about spiritual experiences. In addition, one more thing we have to take into account that most of the materialist scientists give arguments based on some kind of logic or from third person perspective. It is highly unlikely that anyone of them has an experience like it, and if somebody of them has such experience then mostly it is imitation of real experience done in lab. It has not come out of spiritual maturity so it is not spontaneous and does not spread on their life. Then question arises why we should underestimate our own spiritual experiences based on some arguments from scientists who are just speculating, because in the first place no material scientist has understood completely that how brain works. In the end I just want to request politely to all materialist people that forget about the complicated discussion about biogenesis and abiogenesis, if you have understood that life has born out of some chemicals and has no Consciousness to support it then just give us the demonstration. It is completely justified that if you have understood then you have to prove it yourself right now without asking for time. It might be true that natural selection and chance takes millions of years, but if once the intelligent agent like human (scientist) understands then he has to be able to demonstrate it within just few days or months that how evolution happens on its own without the help of intelligence. However, mind you, do not take any readymade DNA or RNA sample and put them into living cells. This kind of creation of synthetic life in labs using readymade DNA and putting it into living cell is not at all the demonstration of life's emergence from inert chemicals, because it does not answer that how that DNA was emerged from inert matter in the first place. You will have to create not just amino acids but everything (proteins, DNA, self-replicating cells and growing amount of information in DNA) from chemicals. Do not give us promise of future discoveries because I don't see any difference in the promise of heaven in future and proving evolution in future. Both of them are not available now and we will not be alive in future to see your promises being fulfilled. After creating life in test tube, please solve the hard problem of consciousness. It is not useful to say that such problem does not exist, it is quite clear that it exist. If you say that it does not exist then we have to say that you have not understood it right. So please give us demonstration of life evolving from matter and neurons causing consciousness (not of any particular part, but the deciding factor, which is having free will) in brains. In addition, explain that how there is consciousness (willful activities) in species who do not have brains or brain like structures. Please do it right now or accept that you do not know. That is all I have to say in short.

Now it is time to talk about the path, which I follow in my life. Before going to the path, which I follow, I will tell you paths, which I do not follow. Because before fixing any belief system as our life's goal we have to be sure that it is the best available and in future if somebody argues against it then there should be no hesitation in our minds to defend it by all means. So again let's talk a little about different paths.

First, I take Sānkhyavāda. It is a very polished thought and appears attractive to our minds. However, in the core Sānkhyavāda leads to materialist and dualist explanation of world. In other words, it is an atheist thought. There is no problem in being atheist but atheism is not explanation of this world in any way. So I reject this theory. In addition, more importantly it does not have any practical Sādhanā (as I know). It is dependent on Yoga system for real life Sādhanā. Without yoga, it is just mental exercise.

We should look at Yoga itself. Why don't I follow Yoga? When I was a child, I had great attraction for yoga and its various āsana-s, tricks of prānāyāma and so on. I had read Raja Yoga written by Swami Vivekananda. I was greatly influenced by His reasoning and clear thoughts. I used to do (and still practice sometimes) different āsana-s. Later I understood that no matter how much we become successful in Yoga, we would always remain attached to the body or at the most the Sukshmaśarīra (astral body). An advanced yogi can stop his breath for hours or even I have heard for months. Still he remains in body and these additional siddhi-s can cause our ego to flourish like never before. Dnyāneśwara mahārāja has also condemned yoga in his book called Dnyāneśwari. So later I gave up the practices of Yoga and continued only with meditation.

Let us think about Jaina ideology. It is very fascinating to see Jaina monks fasting for many days, their living completely naked without any attachment. It seems that these are the real sādhū or monks. On the other hand, a thought also comes in mind that these people are masochists. They are enjoying the pain of their own body. Their ego is getting satisfied by doing these kinds of things. We have not created our body and what right do we have to torture it. In addition, when we look at their philosophy then it is strange. They accept that souls exist but deny Īśvara. This is absurd. How can soul exist without Īśvara because soul is a tiny part of Īśvara. As a drop of water on earth is always a tiny part of ocean, without ocean a drop of water is impossible on earth. In the same way souls also can't exist without Īśvara. If we talk with any Jaina person about Īśvara then he immediately replies that if your Īśvara exist then show us your Īśvara. This is childish, because they believe in soul but nobody has seen soul until now, yet they go on believing in it but don't believe in Īśvara because they cannot see Him. It is impossible to see the soul in the same way it is impossible to see Īśvara. Further main principle of Jainism is Syādavāda, they say that it is impossible to have right knowledge before liberation and only liberated souls can see everything clearly. This kind of thinking denies any rational process that can help us to understand reality before liberation. If we accept that we cannot have real knowledge before liberation then how can we be about liberation and the Jaina monks who pretend to be knowledgeable are knowledgeable in reality? If we apply the Syādavāda about a Jaina monk then there will be seven possibilities of him being knowledgeable. We cannot follow such a confused person who himself is not sure about reality. So at least for me, Jaina ideology is not acceptable.

We go to Buddhism now. It is my favorite because there is so much to study in Buddhism. The essence of Buddhism (in my opinion) is Śūnyavāda (nothingness). Even kshanabhangurvāda (momentary existence) can also be turned into Śūnyavāda. It is impressive to say that everything is born from Śūnya (nothing) and it will go into Śūnya. However, in real life we don't see anything coming out of Śūnya. There is a cause and effect relationship in every incident and everywhere in nature. Everything has got something as its cause; nothing is born out of nothing. Even to have illusion of snake in a rope, there has to be a rope as substratum for illusory snake, if there is no rope then there can be no illusion either, it is true with other illusions also that they all need some real substratum, nothing (Śūnya) cannot be the substratum of anything apparent. Therefore, this Śūnyavāda doesn't stand to practical life situations. I wondered how a person like Gautama Buddha could preach this nothingness. When I studied about it I got the answer that Gautama Buddha did not preach Śūnyavāda. In the Brahma nimantanika Sutta of Majjhima Nikaya when Brahmā (it is not Brahman, He is Brahmā, the creator God) asks Buddha, "Good sir, if that is not partaken of by the allness of all, may it not turn out to be vacuous and empty for you!" To this Buddha replies "Do not think that this is an empty or void state. There is this consciousness, without distinguishing mark, infinite and shining everywhere (Vinnanam anidassanam anantam sabbato-pabham); it is untouched by the material elements and not subject to any power."

This clearly indicates that Buddha himself was not a Śūnyavādi. It is possible that in the course of time other people mixed Śūnyavāda with Buddhism. In fact yogāchāra school of Mahāyāna Buddhism is very similar to Vedānta. However, in the area where I live I don't think there might be any preacher of Mahāyāna is available, because Buddhists in India (in my area) are more politically motivated than of philosophically. Hence currently I do not have much understanding about Yogāchāra, people say that it includes some tantric practices and yoga practices, but currently I don't know much, probably sometime in future if I travel to other parts of the world then I might get more information about Mahāyāna buddhism. According to my information though similar to Vedānta, Yogāchāra is not exactly same, because it teaches solipsism.

Remaining major philosophies or religions are Christian and Muslim. I will talk about them simultaneously because they both share so many fundamental thoughts. In these two religions rebirth is denied (as I know until now). The outcome of just one human life is eternal heaven or eternal hell. This is not justice. There is no rule of karma. We are governed by God as his own will, not according to our credentials. The reincarnation theory explains so many critical points in life but without it life seems to be ruled by God whimsically. So I did not turned towards these two ideologies. I think these two systems, Muslim and Christian, are more useful for social order than philosophical thinking. They give importance to maintain the society and therefore they teach people about eternal heavens or hells so that people behave righteously. They are not much interested in finding the truth; rather they go on believing blindly in something which cannot be accepted by reason. I don't want to condemn these two religions because I think founders of these religions must have compassionate towards the people in society and for the masses who are not interested in philosophical debates, they invented these religions which appeal to masses easily.

After all this discussion what remains is Vedānta. The most sophisticated philosophy I have ever seen. It is really a jewel of humanity. There are only two other thoughts which are similar to this ideology and they are Sufi and Zen. Vedānta, Sufi, and Zen are the essence of human thinking. While Sufism and Zen are more practical, Vedānta also provides logical explanations of this world (according to the understanding of the pupil). So in practice these three are almost same but for discussion in this book we shall use Vedānta (Advaita) because it can quench the thirst of our intellect and then we can sit silently in Zen, the love of God. If anybody thinks that he does not need this intellectual exercise then (in my opinion) he or she can directly approach any sādhana (method) of these three paths. And the people who want to study Vedānta will in the end come to the Dhyāna or silent prayer after completing Karma Yoga and peace can spread on all over the life. As Adi Śankarāchārya tells in His Bhaja Govindam "Prānāyāmam Pratyāhāram Nityānitya Viveka vichāram | Jāpya samet Samādhi vidhānam kuru awadhānam mahat awadhānam||" (in this verse there are some words that indicate towards yoga of Maharshi Patanjali, but in Advaita they have different meaning)

Before we enter into Vedānta, we have to know that there are two main branches in Vedānta also. One is Advaita and another is Dvaita. Dvaita is more depending upon Bhakti or devotion (upāsanā) and Advaita depends upon Dnyāna (knowledge). Ādi Śankarāchārya declares "Dnyāna vihīna sarva matena mukti na bhajati janma śatena". It means that in the opinion of all wise people, without knowledge it is impossible to reach salvation or moksha even in hundreds of births. However, there is still a major role of devotion in Advaita also. I personally have no problem with any system (because they both are right when looked from the corresponding stand points) however when it comes to logical thought then the Advaita is more impressive than Dvaita. So here we shall discuss about Advaita Vedānta.

Let's start our discussion of Advaita Vedānta. The fundamental thoughts of this ideology can be found in two books one is Mānḍukya Upanishad with Gaudapādācharya Kārikā and Śankarāchārya's Bhāshya (commentary) on it and another is Brahmasūtra and Śankarāchārya's Bhāshya on it. Gaudapāda was Guru of Govinda; Govinda was Guru of Ādi Śankarāchārya. Though I have mentioned two books but Teachers of Advaita mention three books as foundation of their ideology. First is the set of ten/eleven principal Upanishads, second is Brahmasūtra and third is Srīmad Bhagavad Gītā. Collectively these three are called as the Prasthāna trayi. In addition there are three important pillars of Advaita Sādhanā; they are Śravana–Manana-Nididhyāsana. Śravana means hearing from Guru, Manana means contemplating upon the heard and Nididhyāsana means implementing the heard in our day to day life.

The Upanishads are useful for Śravana. Brahmasūtra are useful for Manana and Srīmad Bhagavad Gītā is useful for Nididhyāsana.

In this book, I will try to combine these three so in the beginning readers do not need to study them separately. First, we will start from Śravana. For that, we have to turn to major Upanishads that Śankarāchārya accepted for the Advaita philosophy, and written bhāshya on them. However, we do not need to look into all 11 major Upanishads. We will only take the Māndukya Upanishad which is the foundation of Advaita Vedānta. We will use other Upanishads for reference if necessary. Below I am giving the secret method or Sādhanā from Māndukya Upanishad; it is the main purpose of this book.

Secret Method

I am calling it secret because we don't find it easily. May be because Buddhism and Jainism the importance of Meditation has grown in Indian society. Meditation is important (to attain peace) but it is possible only to monks who don't have much worldly duties. But for the people like us who are not monks, to sit in meditation for hours is impossible that's why I am mentioning the sādhanā which is described in Vedānta, it is core of Vedānta. Another drawback of doing only mediation is that the person thinks attaining peace and happiness is possible only in Samādhi and he avoids the normal state, which is wrong according to Vedānta philosophy, which says that everything is Brahman or God so we should learn to be peaceful in all states of Consciousness and not only in any particular state. Therefore, Vedānta prescribes a method of discrimination and detachment, which is useful to everyone to follow in day-to-day life.

Another important factor that I think might be instrumental in giving set back to the method of Upanishad is the rise of Bhakti cult. The tradition of devotees is very good tradition but in current times of intellectual living, it is almost impossible to put faith in God, whom we have never seen and we don't find any tangible proofs of His existence. Today people have become too much analytical and lost their capacity to trust something invisible. Therefore, I think we should go with the intellectual understanding of Upanishads, if Bhakti (devotion) comes with it then it is even more beautiful.

Now let us look into Māndukya Upanishad (English Translation).

AUM! May our ears hear only that which is good, O deities! our eyes may always see good, may we have the body with strong limbs and offer praises, may we complete the full span of life given to us by deities, may Indra, whose fame is growing, be good to us, May the knower of all Universes, Pushāna, be good to us, May the destroyer of evil, Tārkshya, be good unto us, May the Bruhaspati should be good unto us! Aum peace! peace! peace!

AUM, the imperishable, is the all that exists, following is its explanation. Whatever was in the past, whatever is in the present and whatever that will be in the future is the AUM only. And that which is beyond the time is also AUM.

All this is Brahman; this Self is Brahman, which has four quarters.

The waking state with outward attention, with seven limbs and nineteen mouths, which enjoys gross objects, is Vaiśvānara, the first quarter.

The dreaming state with inner attention, with seven limbs and nineteen mouths, which enjoys subtle objects in dream, is Taijasa, the second quarter.

Where asleep, one neither desires for anything nor dreams about anything; that is deep sleep. In dreamless sleep one becomes undivided and mass of Consciousness, here one enjoys only bliss, and it is Prādnya, the third quarter.

It is the Lord of all, it is Omniscient, it dwells inside of beings, and it is the source and beginning of all beings and place of dissolution also.

Neither aware of inward nor outward nor both, not the mass of Consciousness, neither conscious nor unconscious, invisible, indescribable, indefinable, devoid of any qualities, unthinkable, essence of non-duality, refuge of relative existence, silent Awareness, non-dual, it is the fourth known as Self, it is to be realized.

The sound AUM is identical with this Self, the four quarters of Self are identical with the components of syllable, and these components are A, U, M.

The waking Vaiśvānara is identical with A, the first sound because it is first and it encompasses other two (We can remember dream and sleep only in waking state, therefore it is said that the Consciousness in waking state encompasses other two, similarly the sound 'A' also encompasses other two sounds of AUM). One who knows thus becomes first to get all desirable objects.

The dreaming Taijasa is identical with second sound, U, because it comes after A or because it is between the other two letters. One who knows thus attains superior knowledge, is treated equally everywhere and no one ignorant of Brahman is born in his family.

The Prādnya is identical with sound M because it measures the other two (waking and dream appear from deep sleep and again disappear in it, therefore it is said as measure or container of the waking and dreaming), and in it all enters. The one who knows thus knows all inside and outside.

The fourth is that which has no sound, which is incomprehensible, which is the end of all phenomenal worlds, which is Awareness and non-dual. Thus the AUM is same with the Self. The one, who knows this, merges himself in Awareness.

Om śanti! śanti! śantih!

This is the Mānḍukya Upanishad. Śankarāchārya's grand Guru Gaudapādāchārya has given a detailed explanation of this Upanishad and Vedānta in His Kārikā-s. However, some philosophers think that the Kārikā-s leans towards the Buddhists view of Idealistic reality and shows Advaita as Idealistic Monism. Since Advaita is not idealistic school and accepts subject and object both as parts of whole reality, I will not use Kārikā-s here so that there will be no confusion in reader's minds. Idealistic Monism accepts only Subject as reality and everything else as false or imagination of that Subject. However, according to Vedānta the subject and object both come into existence simultaneously, and there are three kinds of realities perceived from the different standpoints.

1. Pāramārthika Sattā (Absolute Reality - Brahman): - When under the spell of ignorance it is also known as Causal aspect (kārana śarira) of Jīva and Īśvara. From this stand point Consciousness is completely unaware and inactively resting in itself. When Consciousness is unaware and inactive this state is called as Sushupti (deep sleep), when Consciousness is aware and inactive then this state is called as Samādhi.

2. Prātibhāsika Sattā (Illusive Reality - Dream world): - It is also known as subtle aspect (sūkshma śarira) of Jīva and Īśvara. From this stand point Consciousness appears to be unaware but active.

3 Vyāvahārika Sattā (Empirical or Transactional Reality - World): - It is also known as Gross aspect (sthūla śarira) of Jīva and Īśvara. From this stand point Consciousness appears to be aware and most active. If we consider a cloth then we can say that cloth is vyāvahārika satta and the cotton of which that cloth is created, is pāramārthika satta. We can separate cotton from cloth because when cloth is made cotton is not destroyed. Prātibhasika Satta is very personal experience like dream or collectively mirage can be a good example.

Ok, then which method does this Upanishad suggest? This method is called "Avasthā Traya Viveka". This Upanishad describes the waking state (jāgrata avasthā), the dream state (swapna avasthā), the deep sleep state (sushupti avasthā) and establishes that the Consciousness that is Ātmā or Brahman is constantly there in all the three states, in the jāgrat, in the swapna and in the sushupti avasthā, as the constant Conscious principle or substratum of three states. It is only in the presence of Ātmā that, in Jāgrata avasthā, the mind or Vaiśvānara (gross body & mind), who is part of the apparent creation perceives, with the aid of the Consciousness, the apparent external world; it is in the presence of the Ātmā that, in Swapna avasthā, when the mind itself becomes the dream world, the dream world is experienced by the agent, Taijasa (subtle body & mind), in dream. In the Sushupti awasthā, though the gross body, subtle body & mind is resolved, the Ātmā continues as the unchanging witness (sākshi chaitanya); the absence of experience, absence of mental activities and feeling of happiness are experienced by Prādnya, the dormant 'I', which is later recalled by the active 'I' on waking up (and we say "I did not know anything; I slept happily"). That Consciousness continues even during the deep sleep state when all instruments of knowledge including the mind are dormant. After waking up the Vaiśvānara can remember the experience of Prādnya because these three Vaiśvānara, Taijasa and Prādnya are strung on the Consciousness. Consciousness is same in these three different agents of three different states.

We have understood that the Consciousness is always there. However, what kind of sādhanā or path does it suggest? Because we have got accustomed of doing something and until now, nothing is suggested here for doing. No meditation, no vipassanā and nothing else. Obvious question that arises is what we should do then. Answer to this question is nothing is to be done; only we have to understand it perfectly. We have to understand that we are that Tūrīya Consciousness (Fourth leg of AUM) and we are eternal. This world is a play of Māyā, which is power of Īśvara (Īśvara is the Consciousness who has the adjunct of Māyā & we are the Consciousness who has the adjunct of ignorance, in core both are one or Advaita), which operates this world as per His orders. We are the Sākshichaitanya, who watch this play, and when this play is over, we go back to Brahman or remain in our real nature (from stand point of Absolute Reality we are always in our real nature). This deep understanding can bring peace and order in our life. If we do some sādhanā (practice) like meditation or vipassanā then it will only harden our Deha Buddhi or body consciousness because all sādhanā-s are possible only through body and mind.

The Dhyāna in Vedanta is not like the Dhyāna in Buddhism's vipassana to look at the breath. Rather it is like Zen (though Zen has also emerged from Buddhism but still it is slightly different) meditation, to sit down quietly when we have done all our work with our best capabilities. Vedānta goes further than Zen and says one should not only practice meditation for particular time but always keep a thought in mind that "I am Consciousness" and remain independent of everything in world (Śankarāchārya Aparokshānubhūti 123), as it is transitory. This is Karma Yoga, Dnyāna Yoga and in last Bhakti Yoga all combined because to sit down quietly without even any thought needs complete devotion to Īśvara, otherwise it is not possible. That is why I said in the beginning that in this book I have given the best Sādhanā (effortless understanding) ever. This is Soham Sādhanā, in it we always remember that we are the Consciousness, which travels through all states of mind i.e. waking, dreaming, and deep sleep without having any stain from any state.

When our bodies die, we (our subtle bodies) go to heaven or hell as per our karma. These heavens and hells are also subjective experiences like dream. I am mentioning this after taking into consideration the recent studies in the area of NDEs (Near Death Experiences). In these experiences, people have reported heavens or hells as per their cultures. Many have reported that they met their deceased relatives in NDE but some have reported that they met their living relatives in NDE. This is why materialists call NDEs as hallucinations but they cannot give any reason that how somebody can experience anything vivid like NDE. I shall discuss it later. For now, we can conclude that heavens and hells, which we experience after death, are also Prātibhāsika Sattā. The Universal mind creates appropriate conditions for every one of us to complete our Karma phalam in heaven or hell. If we don't go to heaven or hell to complete our Karma phalam then death is like deep sleep for us when we become unconscious completely and wake up in some other body.

Liberation in Advaita Vedanta is to be aware of our real nature while living and through Karma Yoga reach to the level of Jīvanmukti. Vairāgya (non-attachment) is also given importance in Vedānta but this does not suggest that we should leave the world and our duties. Vedānta is the only philosophy, which says that this world is emerged out of bliss, it stays in bliss and in the end it dissolves in bliss. All we have to do is to learn this balance of doing (Karma Yoga) and being in bliss (Dhyāna Yoga). If we only prefer karma then we would become workaholic. If we only prefer Dhyāna Yoga then it will resist the very cause of us to come into this life. We have not come here to sit in blissful state of meditation; we were already there before we came to life. We have come here to play with Māyā and share love with other Jīva-s. Problem arises when we forget the undercurrent of bliss which is always there and become miserable. Here Dnyāna yoga comes to our help by indicating our real nature so that we don't get lost in Māyā.

What is Enlightenment?

The correct goal of human life, according to Advaita Vedānta, is one's identification with Brahman, i.e., displacing the "I" from the body and mind and putting it, as it were (is), in Brahman, the original pure being, the existence-consciousness-infinity (bliss). At the macrocosmic level, Īśvara is Brahman, who is operating the Māyā as per the Karmas of Jīva. At the microcosmic level, Jīvātmā is the Brahman, who is enjoying the fruits of his actions as arranged by Īśvara. Jīva and Shiva (Īśvara) both are Brahman, the Non-Dual Awareness, or Advaita. We can never meet Īśvara directly because He is the life and intelligence of the Universe that is omnipresent; to meet anybody he has to be limited in body-mind. We can worship Him and with His help we can experience Brahman, our own nature. Owing to ignorance caused by Māyā, we, the jīvātmā-s, regard ourselves as limited individuals. When we come out of this ignorance and recognize ourselves as Brahman, the Existence-Consciousness-Infinity then it is called "jīvabrahmaikyam" (being one with Brahman), Moksha, or liberation. However, this experience is not like any other ordinary experience, which involves the three components, subject of knowledge (body-mind)-objects of knowledge-process of knowledge (drushtā-druśya-darśan). The experience of Brahman is the experience of pure Subjective peace without any duality of subject and object. After such experience, one is able to recognize the Brahman in all times and in all states. However, before such experience happens we should understand the Brahman through intellectual study and contemplation. According to Advaita, this kind of intellectual understanding is called as Enlightenment, where the words of scriptures (Upanishads) are the only means of Enlightenment.

To indicate the relationship between Jīva and Brahman there are few sentences in śāstra (scriptures) which are called as Mahāvākya (great sentence). There are four Mahāvākya, which are very famous, one quoted from each Veda. They are "pradnyānam brahma," (Aitereya Upanishad – Rug Veda) "aham brahma asmi" (Bruhadāranyaka Upanishad – Yajur Veda) "Tattvamasi" (Chāndogya Upanishad – Sāma Veda), "ayamātmā brahma" (Mānḍukya Upanishad – Atharva Veda) and translated in English, the four mahāvākya would read respectively as "Consciousness is Brahman" "I am Brahman" "Thou art That" "This 'I' is Brahman".

We should now look at the meaning of all four mahāvākya one by one. First, it is "Consciousness is Brahman." This sentence is very deep and has to be understood neatly. It is not said that Brahman is Consciousness because then it will be possible that something else also can be Consciousness. To avoid this kind of confusion it is mentioned that Consciousness is Brahman, wherever there is Consciousness, it is Brahman.

Second mahāvākya is "I am Brahman." Why, because as mentioned in previous sentence (Mahāvākya) that Consciousness is Brahman and I am Consciousness therefore "I" am Brahman.

Third Mahāvākya is "Tat Tvam Asi" (you are that). It is used to avoid any confusion that may rise while using the previous sentence "I am Brahman." We usually refer to our body-mind as "I" and when we say "I am Brahman" then there can be confusion about the real nature of "I". To understand this mahāvākya, we have to understand the meaning of the three words used in this sentence. There are two concepts in understanding any word, first is Vāchyārtha and second is Lakshyārtha. Vāchyārtha means meaning indicated by word and Lakshyārtha means meaning indicated by the intention behind the word. If we take the Vāchyārtha of "You are that" then it can cause great confusion. How can I the limited and ignorant jīva, be Īśvara who is omnipresent and omniscient. Therefore, we should take the Lakshyārtha of words to understand the meaning of great sentence. To understand the concept of Lakshyārtha, let's take an example. Suppose one person meets a young man named Devadatta after many years. That person had seen the Devadatta when he was a kid. When the person meets grown up Devadatta again, he identifies Devadatta as "He is that". Here the lakshyārtha of word "He" is the Soul of Devadatta and not the body, because body has grown up and not the same which was there in childhood. The Lakshyārtha of "that" is again soul of Devadatta which was there in the kid's body. Therefore, when the man says "He is that", then the intention behind the sentence is the identity of the soul of Devadatta.

Similarly, Lakshyārtha of "you" used in sentence is the pure you or "I," (Kūtastha chaitanya) devoid of adjunct of ignorance (body-mind). Lakshyārtha of "that" used in sentence is the Īśvara (Brahma chaitanya) devoid of adjunct of Māyā (manifested Universe). Therefore, when Guru says to disciple "you are that," it means the Consciousness without ignorance (Avidyā) and Consciousness without Māyā is one or Advaita.

Fourth great sentence is "This 'I' is Brahman," it again indicates towards pure Consciousness devoid of the adjunct of body-mind, the Tūrīya, which is present in three states of Consciousness, is Brahman.

"Consciousness is Brahman", "I am Brahman", "This 'I' is Brahman", these three sentences remove the separateness among different Jīva-s and last sentence "You are that" establishes Oneness of Jīva and Īśvara.

So far, we understood that the only reality is Brahman and everything else, i.e. the world of objects and our own body-mind complexes are empirically real. This is expressed by the famous sentence, "Brahma satyam jaganmithyā, jīvo brahmaiva nāparah" ("Brahman is the Truth; the world is dependent upon Brahman for its existence, it does not have separate existence; Jīva-s are Brahman, not else"). The moment somebody understands this knowledge effectively, he or she is said to be enlightened and free in this very life.

The freedom or liberation from the bondage of samsāra (cycle of compulsory births and deaths) born out of enlightenment is called as "moksha." The benefit of this knowledge is peace and bliss (ānanda). The one who has gained the knowledge and successfully applied it in everyday life is called, "jīvanmukta" (liberated in this very life) or "Dnyānī" (knower).

Anybody can reach to this level of Jīvanmukti (liberation) in this life but it is also true that a certain level of spiritual maturity is necessary. To reach this level of maturity there are four major sādhanā prescribed in śāstra. It is good to do these sādhanā in presence of Guru but if we don't know any person who is capable of guiding us then we can surrender to Īśvara or in other words to The Cosmic Order. Here we have come to a point where Vedānta goes hand in hand with Buddhism. Buddha has also given this same instruction as "Dhammam Śaranam Gachchāmi." Here Dhamma does not mean Buddha dharma but the Cosmic order who is the Sadguru in Advaita. That is why in Hinduism it is said "Krushnam vande Jagadgurum", means I bow to the Krushna (Īśvara) who is Jagadguru (mentor of the Universe). Here also, Krushna does not mean any person but the same Cosmic order or Intelligence of the Universe mentioned above. One more point has to be understood, sādhanā and knowledge are not suggested to become free but to realize our true nature as free. Vedānta does not accept the idea that we have to attain freedom, it accepts that we are already free but we have forgotten it. This is the major difference in other religions, which talk about Moksha, and Vedānta. Vedānta accepts that our real nature is free because we are Brahman in reality, the unstained Consciousness but other religions do not have Consciousness in the core of the Universe so they talk about Karma and Kshanika Vidnyāna. Vedānta accepts this Universe as eternal Brahman and we are tiny waves on that Brahman. No matter how big or small wave is or how long a wave goes ultimately it has to fall back into ocean, in fact wave cannot go out of ocean. In the same way no matter how much away we appear to go from Brahman one day we will have to fall back into it.

Significance of Enlightenment

An Enlightened man experiences this world; world does not disappear for him. However, his outlook and attitude towards the world changes completely. He identifies himself with non-dual Brahman. He knows that the world, including the body mind complex is by nature transient so he has no sorrow, no fear, no desire, and no worry. If anything listed above comes, it comes to body or mind in this Vyāvahārika sattā and He identifies himself with pāramārthika satta, so these things do not affect Him as they affect other people. Dnyānī is not affected by anything, good or bad happening in the world. In the dream, a tiger attacked me, but when I wake up, I do not find any wound in the body. If I win a big prize in a lottery in the dream, on waking up, I do not find my bank balance increased. The fire in the movie does not burn the screen. If somebody steps on my shadow, I am not hurt. Similarly, the happenings in the empirical world (in the "vyāvahārika jagat") do not affect the Enlightened person.

This state of freedom from happenings in the empirical world is a psychological freedom arising from the knowledge and does not extend to the body. The Dnyānī has no fear, no worry, no craving, no attachment and no hatred. All these are psychological phenomena and not physical. Freedom or liberation from empirical world does not mean fire in this world would not burn body of an enlightened person or water would not drown him. All these things are there but they happen in this empirical world and knower of truth does not get identified with body as "I" so he accepts everything as momentary. Lord Krushna in Gītā has advised Arjuna to accept all sorrows of this world as momentary. This is the real meaning of transcending sorrow.

In addition, Enlightenment brings contentment. The person who identifies himself with Pure Consciousness becomes calm because all needs are needs of body and mind and these two are not permanent so these needs are also not permanent. They come and go with time so the Knower does not desire for anything. However, it is also true that he does not become dead like rock. He enjoys all things that come to him by fate and Karma yoga.

If a man knows Ātmā or pure Self then his desires become weak because now he starts looking at things from the perspective of Consciousness. When he looks at the nature of Consciousness, then it is eternal and everything else is momentary. After considering this, desire for anything becomes weak because no matter how much we gain still it is momentary and one day vanishes. Therefore, for an enlightened person everything here is a play of Māyā and he uses everything as children use toys. Enlightened person sees everyone else's soul as his own soul so there is no hatred for anyone in this world. There remains only pure love for all creatures on this planet.

Since a Dnyānī (Enlightened) sees body other than himself, he is not affected by old age of body or death of body. He does not try to preserve his body after death like ancient Egyptians or some rich people these days who hope that one-day science will find some way to make dead body alive. This is absurd for an enlightened man because he sees himself as life and not as the entity, which is living life. Because of this approach if someday science brings dead body to life again, still it is useless because the individual who was living in the body before death would have gone to some other body and life which has entered in this dead body is going to be different than the first.

However, the body mind complex with which the person who has become a Dnyānī is part of the vyāvahārika world and as long as that body lives, there are duties pertaining to it. Therefore, if the Dnyānī is a householder, he does not cease to perform the duties and obligations towards the body, the family, and the society. He does his duties with purpose but without any desire and he accepts the results of actions good or bad, favorable or unfavorable with equanimity.

The Dnyānī is not dependent upon anything except his identification with Brahman for peace and bliss. This does not mean that he stops enjoying good things of life, like good food or music or literature, but he does not have desire for them. That is to say, if it is there, he takes it and enjoys it, but if it is not there, he does not miss it. He may have preferences, but he has no need. If the Dnyānī is ill, he will also go to the doctor, but he will do so without any anxiety. If his wife is ill, the knower will look after her with love but without anxiety or worry.

Means of Enlightenment

In my understanding and according to Advaita Vedānta also, enlightenment is obtained only through knowledge of identity with Brahman and not through any karma (practice) or upāsanā (Bhakti). Then question arises that why other three parts Karma-Bhakti-Dhyāna are advised in Vedānta. Answer is they are advised to do the "Chittaśuddhi" (Purification of Mind). Generally, our mind is impure with thoughts arising out of rajoguna (confusion) and tamoguna (ignorance). Karma-Bhakti-Dhyāna is useful to overcome these rajoguna and tamoguna. It helps to increase Sattvaguna (Awareness). If knowledge is used by a mind which is full of anxiety and misery then it is very much possible that the knowledge will be wasted or misused.

If we say "you are Brahman" to a person who is full of anxiety and thinks himself as body then he will ridicule the knowledge and also can cause harm to himself or society. Therefore, before taking knowledge seriously, first we have to cut the attachment and identity of body-mind. However, it is very difficult if mind has not become calm at least to a certain extent. Therefore, to make mind calm we have to practice Karma-Bhakti-Dhyāna. After that, we should learn to be aware of the reality everywhere in the world that we are pure Consciousness. Anywhere we go we should try to remember this. If we wake up from sleep then remember that we are Consciousness and it is the body, which was asleep and now woke up. While eating, remember that body or Vaiśvānara is eating and I am just experiencing it from inside (relative to body otherwise there is no inside or outside for Brahman). While in the marketplace beware that the loud sounds and chaos in market is part of Māyā and it is transient but I am pure Consciousness who is just watching it, I will be there after all this disappears. Same thing should be remembered while enjoying worldly pleasures and in sorrows, that all this is transient. One day it happens that, we are aware of it in dream also and behave in dream as conscious as we are in waking state. When awareness increases, dream disappears because our unawareness is necessary for dream to exist. When awareness of māyā increases dreams stop and we can experience deep peace and bliss instead of dream.

Lastly, awareness enters into deep sleep and thus it becomes constant in all three states of being. But it is a very long journey and takes ample time. We have to constantly apply the knowledge of Jīva-Brahma-Aikyam (Jīva and Brahman are one in their core).

Jīvanmukti

According to Advaita Vedānta, as a result of knowledge of jīva-brahma-aikyam, liberation from samsāra (moksha) is possible in the current life itself, one does not have to wait for the end of life. When we can remember our real nature in all situations then it is said that we are liberated and become Jīvanmukta, it is the uniqueness of Vedānta, and it says that it is possible to live life as Jīvanmukta (liberated). Liberation is not after death or on the judgment day. Vedānta does not show any hope rather it says that we are born free, God has already saved us and we are already in heaven but we have to recognize it.

Does Enlightenment happen suddenly or gradually?

Enlightenment is not a new state or an event. The infinite Brahman is our real nature. The notion of being separate limited individuals subject to the bondage of samsāra is only ignorance of reality in the mind. The moment one gains the knowledge, "I am Brahman" he/she starts sensing freedom, however, it is not that something new happens. Everything is same as it was before, only one starts looking at things in a different angle. Liberation does not happen as any event because anything that starts in time, one day ends in time. This is the undeniable rule of nature. So if liberation has to be there forever then it has to be there from eternity in past otherwise it cannot remain for eternity in future. However, the Enlightenment as realization may happen suddenly when one understands through logic and through śāstra from Guru, but it takes time to implement it in our day-to-day life. If mind is not purified completely then we have to practice the Sādhana Chatushtaya with Karma yoga and Bhakti even after realization that I am not the body-mind but pure Consciousness.

Videha Mukti

If we die without identifying with Brahman then we come back to this world unconsciously as we went. However, if we die with awareness of Brahman then we do not come back unconsciously. We can remain in Consciousness of this Universe for eternity, which is called as Videha Mukti. It is not that we are forced to stay there forever, we can manifest again if we want as we have come here now. Coming from Brahman to relative world happens out of bliss. Problem occurs if we forget how to go back, as now we have forgotten how to go back to Brahman and identified ourselves with body-mind. Brahman is our real home and until we go back there, we cannot be happy.

The Qualifications for Dnyānayoga

In Śāstra (scriptures) of Vedānta, some qualifications are thought to be important to study Advaita. As we have talked before, these qualifications are not there to attain liberation but because of them, our mind becomes serene and capable of grasping the subtle thoughts of Advaita. These qualifications are in terms of four important factors (Sādhana Chatushtaya). They are -

1) Nitya-Anitya Viveka (Discrimination between eternal and ephemeral)

2) Vairāgya (Non Attachment towards ephemeral)

3) Shata Sampatti (Six Qualities) - i) Śama - Control over mind ii) Dama - Control over senses iii) Uparati - Remembering the transient nature of worldly pleasures and not getting attracted towards them iv) Titikshā - Tolerance v) Śraddhā \- Faith in Guru/Īśvara and Śastra vi) Samādhāna - Contentment

4) Mumukshā (longing to understand the truth)

Above listed qualities are said to be essential for acquiring knowledge. However, we do not need to be worried if we do not possess them. If we follow, the sādhanā of Karma-Bhakti-Dhyāna, then we can acquire these qualities gradually.

Māyā

Māyā is very important concept and has to be understood properly. Māyā literally means illusion. Advaita Vedānta denies any causal relationship between Brahman and the world and regards everything that we experience through senses as Māyā (including senses themselves), illusion. It is the power of Brahman. Ādi Śankarāchārya describes Māyā as "avyaktanāmni parameśa śakti" (Viveka Chudāmani 108), means, Māyā is power of the Supreme Lord (Brahman) called as Unmanifest. It is not different than Brahman. This basic unmanifested Māyā is not manifested in front of us, however; we can experience it in deep sleep as ignorance and infer its presence from its effects like appearance of manifold world inside homogenous Brahman. Māyā is unthinkable of real or unreal. First, the definition of "real" according Vedānta has to be understood. When word "real" is used in Vedānta it means something which cannot be negated by any means. However in our day to day life we find that the future negates present and present negates past. We cannot experience present and past or future and present together, we can experience only present. When we go into deep sleep the whole world is negated by sleep. Only we, the Consciousness remain unchanged in three states of time and experience. We do not change with time, because we can remember the past experience in present. We do not change with states of Consciousness and remain constant in all three states viz. waking, dreaming and sleep because we can remember the dream and sleep in waking state. Therefore, Advaita draws a conclusion that there are two factors, one is real, another is unreal, real factor cannot be negated and unreal factor can be negated. Māyā (the presence of multiplicity) is unreal because it is negated. However, it is not completely unreal because we can experience it and while the experience lasts it appears as only reality. Therefore, Vedānta calls Māyā as mithyā, means something which exists but does not has its own existence; it depends upon another thing for its existence. For example the pot of clay exists but it does not have its own existence and depends upon clay for its existence. Māyā depends upon Consciousness (Brahman) for its existence. We can draw the following equation.

Māyā = Brahman + Appearance of multiplicity (world)

Another unique feature of māyā is, it is dangerous only when we are under its spell, once we go out of it or try to investigate for its reality then it does not cause any trouble, as we may run before mirage until we investigate about it, when we understand its illusory nature then it loses its charm. Māyā is made up of the space (deśa), time (kāḷa), and diverse objects (vastu), these three different qualities. They exist only on transactional plane (i.e. inside māyā), once we understand these three as mithyā then they appear but do not exist, and one more understanding happens that they had never existed because there is no sense of past when we transcend time, only Brahman exists as eternal Now.

Let's think about what is māyā again. It is an inference drawn to explain the presence of world inside Brahman. This power of māyā is wielded by Īśvara because no power is sentient; it needs Conscious entity to operate it. Another reason to call Māyā as unthinkable of real or unreal is, because of māyā, no change takes place in its substratum i.e. Brahman, but still Brahman appears as manifold world. As clouds cannot make any change in sky, similarly, māyā cannot make any change in Brahman. However, we always experience māyā through our senses, which are themselves a part of māyā, therefore, we can say that māyā experiences itself. Māyā possesses three qualities, (again inference drawn by looking at the phenomenal world which has broadly three qualities) sattva, raja and tama. To put it more precisely these three are not qualities of Māyā but they are Māyā. When will to manifest the world arises in Īśvara (Consciousness), Īśvara gives birth to Brahma, who is the Lord having quality of Raja. This Brahmadeva who has the projecting power of Māyā, gives birth to world, and then Īśvara takes care of this world in the form of Vishnu, who possesses Sattva. In the end after billions of years when Īśvara wants to rest, He destroys the world in the form of Śankara, who represents the Tama. Śankara also helps creation with His veiling power by covering the homogenous nature of Brahman by ignorance. This manifestation, maintenance, and destruction continue as an unending cycle. Here the arising of will and wanting to rest is not the modification in Brahman, it is the modification in the mind of Īśvara. However, Īśvara is not different from Brahman; He is the sense of 'I', which is there in Brahman, who dreams the world according to His will without modifying Brahman. We are under the rule of Īśvara as long as we are under the spell of Māyā, when we realize the falsity of Māyā; we become free from Īśvara's rule.

Māyā is there to express the bliss, which exists in the Brahman. Māyā helps Consciousness to manifest and enjoy its own bliss by imagining duality; further Consciousness (Īśvara) can experience its eternal nature only in comparison with perishable Māyā. Though it is there to help Consciousness but when Consciousness forgets its own nature then this same māyā can become very dangerous. That is why mystics in Vedānta philosophy have advised to be aware, all the time, of this world as māyā.

This is the principal sādhanā, while doing our sādhanā when we try to remember our nature as Consciousness all the time; we try to be aware of Māyā, which is around us. In simple words, Māyā can be defined as everything that we can experience through our senses and mind (including senses and mind themselves).As Kaivalya Upanishad 12 and 13 mentions "With the mind deluded by māyā that (Brahman) itself identifies with the body and performs all actions during the waking state and attains fulfillment through various sense objects like woman, food, drink, etc." "While in dream that Jiva becomes the experiencer of pleasure and pain in the subjective universe projected by his own mind. When everything is resolved in the state of deep sleep, that Jiva attains the nature of ānanda overpowered by ignorance."

Here we come to a very interesting topic. What is Jīva? Actually, there are three important terms in Advaita Philosophy, which need to be understood. Brahman, Īśvara and Jīva. Brahman is the absolute or Pāramārthika reality. Īshvara is the creator of the world (in Vyāvahārika sattā) and Jīva-s are the individual persons who enjoy the fruits of their karma-s as arranged by Īśvara. We can use the metaphor of ocean to understand it more clearly. The waves on the ocean can be called as different Jiva-s, ocean itself is the Īśvara and the water of the ocean can be called as Brahman. The main reason of the appearance of "multiple" Jiva-s is ignorance of the real nature of Self as Brahman. Here once again an important issue arises that what is the locus of ignorance because we cannot call Brahman as ignorant since that is self-luminous. We cannot call Īśvara as ignorant because He is one and only, there is no delusion of many Īśvara-s. We cannot call Jiva as ignorant or locus of ignorance because Jiva-s are themselves the products of ignorance. Then actually where does the ignorance reside? This same question is answered by ādi-Śankarāchārya in His commentary on Bruhadāranyaka Upanishad. Śankarāchārya replies to an objection as "let it be so, Brahman is not the author of ignorance or subject to error. But it is not admitted that there is any other Conscious entity but Brahman which is the author of ignorance or subject to error." (Bruhadāranyaka Upanishad 1-4-10). It means though untouched by ignorance Brahman itself appears as ignorant on the relative plane or in Vyāvahārika Jagat as multiple Jīva-s. However, we cannot deny the experience of individual Jīva as being ignorant before acquiring knowledge and knowledgeable after acquiring knowledge. It is not that there is only ignorant Jīva-s; there are knowledgeable Jīva-s also. This logic suggests that Jīva-s are locus of ignorance and knowledge, Brahman is not the locus of ignorance and knowledge. After considering above points we come to conclusion that, though Jīva-s are locus however, they are Brahman and naught else, hence Brahman itself is the locus of ignorance.

Brahmsūtra and Srimad Bhagavad Gītā

I have mentioned before that I will give complete reference of Prasthāna Trayi in this book. We saw about the principal Upanishad above now let's discuss about Brahma sūtra and Bhagavad Gītā. In Brahma sūtra-s we find that Vedānta is defended against other conflicting ideologies of those days. It is very vast. In it, Vyāsadeva and later Ādi Śankarāchārya have countered all other contradicting ideas of those days. Its language is old and it is not contemporary so I don't think there is any need to go deep into Brahma sūtra-s in this book because we have already discussed about contemporary philosophies. If someone wants to study them then translations of Brahmasūtras and Śankarāchārya's commentary on it are available easily. If someone has any problem in understanding those translations then he/she can contact me, I will try to explain as per my understanding.

We should discuss few important points from Srimad Bhagavad Gītā, which are related to this book. In Gītā lord Krushna asks Arjuna to follow the Karma Yoga which I have already mentioned in this book from Gītā. However, Lord Krushna gives details about Karma Yoga. He tells what exactly the Karma Yoga is. In brief I can say that Karma Yoga (as described in Gītā) is doing our work with complete focus and after completing the work offer it to Īśvara and don't ask for any fruit of Karma. Enjoy the doing of work or Karma and not long for the fruit or result while doing the karma or after completing it. If Īśvara thinks it is right to give fruit then He will give it to us and if He does not think it right then He will not give any fruit. After we give up the fruit, we can rest in bliss of meditation. This is the idea behind the Karma Yoga.

Lord Krushna describes method of meditation. Krushna also gives information about how the nature works, relation between the Consciousness (Kshetradnya) and body (kshetra - field of consciousness).

In the end, Krushna promises if anybody devotes to Krushna (Īśvara) then Īśvara will make him or her free from all his Karma. This is the unique approach of Hinduism (Vedānta) against Buddhism and Jainism. In these two philosophies, karma can only end when we enjoy its fruit in the form of happiness or sorrow. But according to Vedānta if Īśvara thinks it is right then He can liberate Jīva from all his past karma anytime without forcing him to face the consequence of his Karma. It seems wrong because liberating anybody in the middle is injustice with others. However, this is the only way possible. When Jainism and Buddhism suggest that karma has to be exhausted then they forget that karma is infinite because we are continuously adding into our sanchita karma and infinite thing cannot be exhausted in any way. So only hope for liberation is Īśvara, Īśvara can mercifully liberate us from our Karma by providing the right knowledge of Advaita.

Back to Top

### Chapter Five: - Removing Doubts

This is the biggest chapter of this book. The basics of Vedānta are simple and precise; however the doubting mind makes them more difficult to understand. Therefore, in this chapter, we are going to read answers to various questions that may arise in minds of readers. Some topics are in question answer format and some are just plain paragraphs. Some of these issues are discussed between my friends and me directly on various occasions. I have discussed some topics online with my online friends, and I found some questions in different discussion forums on internet. I thought combining all of these questions is going to remove almost all doubts from reader's mind so I have combined all. They are not sorted topic wise because the time and occasion was different when we discussed them and I have put them in this book as I remembered them. One may find some questions repeated again and again, and I have given different answers to them, however, one need not be confused because of seemingly different answers, since it is the way of Vedānta to talk to the questioner taking into account his current viewpoint about world. The apparent answers are given just to calm down the mind for the moment; ultimate answer for all is same.

Brahman itself appears as Jīvātmā to experience Māyā

Until now we have seen that Consciousness is not born out of physical processes. Then what is Consciousness? We have to accept that Consciousness exists independently on its own without the need of matter or energy; for the sake of convenience we can call that Consciousness as Awareness or pure Consciousness. However, such independent Awareness (Brahman) cannot have any particular character or individuality. Without individuality, it is impossible to experience the world. So whenever self-sufficient Awareness (Brahman) manifests (appears as manifested from the stand point of Transactional Reality) it always manifests as individual. First, it gives birth (imagines through Māyā) to Universe as Īśvara, and then enters into it to experience the beauty of its own creation (imagination). To put it in more precise words we can say that first Universe is imagined (through māyā) in Brahman by Īśvara and then we appear in the Universe to experience it. Īśvara is the primordial 'I' which arises in pure Brahman without any modification in Brahman. As arising of air does not cause any modification in the sky, similarly arising of Īśvara does not cause any modification in Brahman. Īśvara is also called as 'Jagat jyoti', the illumining principal of this world. If someone asks why Īśvara arises in Brahman then answer is, it happens effortlessly, because it is the nature of Brahman to become active and inactive (from stand point of Transactional Reality) and from the stand point of ultimate truth, Īśvara never arises in Brahman, and there is no māyā. Māyā and its wielder Īśvara both exist when we are under the spell of ignorance, when we go beyond ignorance then both of them are non-existent, only Brahman exist or in the words of devotees only Īśvara exist who is not the wielder of māyā, because there is no māyā. Active Īśvara is present until we are under the spell of ignorance.

However, the Universe is inert and Consciousness is alive, so how can we, the Consciousness, experience it? To combine these to polarities, there needs some connection between them, that connection is Jīvātmā or Soul. Jīvātmā means Jīva+ātmā. Jīva means life force behind body-mind or prāna and ātmā means Consciousness. We can say Jīvātmā is pure Consciousness combined with material energy (Consciousness filtering through body-mind, as "I am this [body-mind]). When for any reason Jīvātmā leaves (reflection/filtration stops) the body, body becomes dead and useless. One may think how can this process of reflection takes place, because body is inert and material, how does Consciousness gets identified with inert body-mind? Consciousness and matter are opposite to each other. Yes, it is true but consciousness can do this with the help of other subtle bodies which are made in such a way that they can combine the two different things together.

Four Bodies of Soul

In Vedānta we believe that there are four types of bodies of individual and cosmic consciousness which are made of five kinds of substances. These four bodies help Consciousness to perform action in this physical world. These bodies belong to Māyā, however, Māyā is also part of Consciousness. Consciousness is like ocean and Māyā is like waves on that ocean. These bodies are -

Sthūla (Gross): - This body is made up from Annamaya Kosha (organic material). We experience this body in waking state and we can see, touch each other's bodies easily. This kind of body made up of organic material is born and die again and again. Other bodies do not take birth with this body; they merge in each other and travel to another organic body after death of one body. Therefore we can say that birth and death belong to this body.

Sūkshma (Subtle): - This body is made up from three different substances. These are Prānamaya Kosha (life force), Manomaya Kosha (mind stuff) and Vidnyānamaya Kosha (the individual consciousness). We can experience this Sūkshma śarira (Astral Body) while in dream when physical body is sleeping but mind continues to work and creates dream scenes out of it-self. The Consciousness experiences dream in the mind, made up from the stuff of mind with the help of organs of Sūkshma śarira. This body does not die with physical body and travels to another body after death. Different deities, angels, demons and deceased people have these bodies; they do not have physical bodies. They operate on subtle planes of this world. When somebody dies that person may become angel or demon according to his karma, and when his work in that from completes then again that subtle body comes in contact with physical body of the creature which matches that subtle body and starts operating in this world. This kind of travelling continues until the ignorance in the form of causal body is destroyed forever.

Kārana (Cause): - This body is made up of Ānandamaya Kosha (bliss) and ignorance. This is very close to Consciousness, this is the feeling of Self (I) mixed with ignorance of our own Self or Consciousness, which is there in all of us. This I is pure bliss which is the basic substance and all other bodies dwell in this bliss. We can experience this body when we enter into deep sleep, when there is no other object to experience therefore, Consciousness remains dormant in itself until other bodies are recharged by energy and become active again. This body of ignorance is called as Causal body because it causes other two bodies to emerge i.e. dreaming and waking states are caused by deep sleep state. Desires of Jīvātmā hide in this ignorance when other bodies are not functioning, when other bodies are capable of functioning then these desires manifest in mind and we usually start running before them.

Mahākārana (Great Cause): - Some knowers of Vedānta do not accept this fourth body as different from third, so they accept only three kinds of bodies. However, for the sake of convenience and understanding more clearly we should think about this body different that third. This body is not personal, this is Universal body. When we die, and if our karma does not make us angel or demon, then we enter into this body until we get another physical body. In west, the concept of Collective Unconsciousness is similar to this body. This body is also pure bliss. There are countless jīvātmans in this body right now, which are unconsciously waiting for right time and right body to get birth and fulfill their desires.

Can we see Soul/ is there any scientific proof of Jivātmā?

Obvious answer to this question is No, we cannot see soul but we can infer its presence. For example, as we cannot see gravity but we can see effects of gravity, in the same way we can see effects of presence of a Soul/Jivātmā. When we see inanimate matter (body) moving on its own then we have to accept that there must be a Soul inside, who is moving the physical body with the help of other subtle bodies.

There are some scientific proofs also which indicate towards the existence of Soul. A Canadian neurosurgeon Dr. Wilder Penfield has done some research in this field. Dr. Penfield set up a High tech system to observe the brain activity of a subject who was told to do simple activities like raising arm. When he raised his arm certain part of the brain was activated and the subject described the event as "I raised my arm". When he brought his arm down that part of the brain was seemed to be deactivated and the subject described the event as "I put my arm down". Then Dr. Penfield artificially activated that part of brain and the arm rose up. The subject described this event as "My arm went up". But Dr. Penfield specifically asked "Did you raise your arm?" The subject replied "I did not raise my arm, it raised up by itself." Then Dr. Penfield deactivated the brain and the arm went down. The subject reported that his arm went down by itself; he did not bring it down.

Dr. Penfield realized that in second case he was the agent who activated brain externally and raised the arm. But who was the agent in first case that used the machinery of brain to raise the arm and who was watching the experiment of Dr. Penfield.

We can conclude with this evidence that it is Soul who uses the mechanism of body to experience the world.

How and When Soul enters a womb?

It depends on individual souls and their karma. But as standard time we can take the time of first breath of any child that is the time of soul (the set of subtle and causal body) entering the child's body (gross body). But if any soul has done such karma which fruit can be experienced only in womb then it is possible that soul may enter at any stage in womb. It is possible that we think soul enters womb at the time of father's sperm enter into mother's egg. This may be true with some souls but not all souls, this can't be universal rule. We have to understand that this is the natural process of sex. Sex is the way of nature to create gross bodies. It is true that in the womb child has got heart and other organs working but that does not tell us anything about soul, it is the gross body getting created for the use of soul and mother's prāna or vital energy helps nature to create body. When body is ready, the soul, which matches that body, enters into it from the Mahākārana Śarira (Great Cause) and starts working in this world. At the most we can speculate that soul enters body when body becomes conscious of external world because without consciousness it is useless for any soul to be in the body. It gives rise to another question, is body's consciousness different from soul consciousness? Answer is yes and no both. Because soul itself is Consciousness combined with subtle body but there is machinery in gross body which is also necessary for consciousness to manifest and start working. As we experience in dream, soul continues to work but gross body rests, there is no awareness of gross body in dream because it is resting. To have awareness of gross body, that body has to be in the state of arousal.

What is Chidābhāsa?

Chidābhāsa is combination of pure consciousness and mind-body complex. When consciousness becomes entangled with a particular mind-body then it starts feeling like departed from everything else. This gives birth to the egoistic feeling and thoughts in mind like what should I do to become happy? How can I secure my future? Etc. Because of the entanglement with mind-body, the pure consciousness forgets its nature, which is beyond time and starts thinking that it will die when the body dies. It causes so much hurry in life, because we have to attain everything in a minor period. This, I think, is the main cause for the misery of human beings. As Lord Krushna suggested in Bhagavad-Gita "aśāntasya kutaḥ sukham", means the person who is not calm cannot enjoy anything in life, the feeling of ego destroys this calmness in our life.

In Advaita Vedānta two important terms are used to show the manifestation of Consciousness on individual level. i) Kūtastha Chaitanya & ii) Jīva Chaitanya. We shall now look into these terms to have precise understanding of Jīva.

i) Kūtastha Chaitanya: - Kūtastha means (kūta -perishable, stha - indifferently situated, chaitanya - Consciousness) the Consciousness which is indifferently situated in perishable ignorance or perishable intellect/body. Here word situated does not mean 'rested upon' rather it means 'situated by providing support to perishable intellect'. Rather than intellect, ignorance is a more precise word, because ignorance is the reason of existence of Jīva.

ii) Jīva Chaitanya: - Jīva Chaitanya means the manifestation of Kūtastha chaitanya through the adjunct of mind-body. Because of the ignorance of its own nature, the Kūtastha chaitanya manifests through mind-body to achieve happiness in this world and that manifestation is called as Jīva or Chidābhāsa. When this same Jīva becomes enlightened about its real nature, then it stops running before world to achieve happiness and becomes free.

What is Mind?

Mind (collective four parts of _antahakarana_ ) is ability of consciousness to experience the world and to take decisions deliberately. With the use of mind, Jīva can perform his actions smoothly. We can see clearly that even animals have mind and some studies suggest that plants may also have mind. But only in human beings mind seems to be manifested completely.

According to Advaita the mind is a part of _antahakarana_. Antahakarana means "inner organ." antahakarana is not any sense like eyes, ears etc. but it is an inner organ that collects information from senses and formulates a Vrutti (mental image from sense data), which is illumined by Consciousness. Antahakarana has four parts, mānasa (mind), buddhi (intellect), chitta (memory), ahankāra (ego). The first part mind is the locus of emotions, feelings, doubt, indecisiveness, worry etc. The second part intellect is the locus of discrimination, logic, judgment, reason, decisions etc. The third part is memory where all gained knowledge is stored to retrieve later and the fourth part ego is the locus of 'me' (ahamkāra) and 'mine' (mamakāra). Ego is the sense "I am this (body-mind)" and everything that relates to body-mind is "mine".

What is Bondage?

This is the most important question because if we do not know what is our bondage then obviously we will not try to become free and Enlightenment is ultimate freedom. To understand the bondage we should look into life and see what is causing us trouble, to make this process of introspection easy I give a little idea. Our bondage is our Mind. We have become so much engaged in mind that we have forgotten how to stop thinking and giving unnecessary emotional responses to situations. Our mind has taken control of our whole being. Question is why this happened? Only possible answer to this is Ego. We discussed earlier about ego and this ego has created hell for us. We are caught in a continued circle of compulsive thinking. Because of it we cannot see what is reality and what is our own imagination or trap of mind.

What is liberation?

Liberation is freedom from personality or compulsive thinking of mind. It does not mean to stop mind immediately but to understand that we are not bound by mind's thinking process and we are always free. When we get out of this cycle of thoughts after thoughts, we become free (which is already the case) and Enlightenment (in the sense of experience) happens with us. Our Consciousness which is engaged in mind returns on itself and experiences its own reality beyond space and time. Consciousness or Awareness becomes so intense that it can penetrate deep inside sleep and when someone experiences himself without body in sleep then consciousness' entanglement with body and mind becomes loose and it can experience its real nature. Then death ceases to exist, that person can say with his own experience that he or she is immortal and does not have any limitation of time. So a deep relaxation happens.

But all these things happen on right time after we come out of our mind and its old thinking patterns. To overcome the wrong thinking patterns Advaita Vedānta offers the path of intellectual understanding, by deeply scrutinizing our day-to-day life we can understand our real nature and then achieve permanent uninterruptable peace.

Why do we need to get liberated?

It depends upon person to person, somebody may think that he is fine with his mind and its thinking then no problem, that person can continue doing so as long as he wants. However, in the evolution of Ego a time comes when automatically mind stops and enlightenment happens. Then there is no question of our choice. It is important to know correctly, what is liberation. Liberation is freedom from selfish attitude. It is good for human society as a whole to have more and more liberated people, who will share love with rest of the society without selfish motives.

Can we get liberated?

When we look at our mind from a distance then it is obvious that we feel it is almost impossible for us to reach to the level of Enlightenment at least in this life. Enlightenment might be possible to Krushna, Buddha, Jesus, Osho or Ramana Maharshi, it is not for us.

However, this is not true; everybody has the potential of being enlightened or liberated in this very lifetime. However, it depends on the person's level of spiritual maturity. If we are mature enough (sādhana chatushtaya sampanna), then there is no difficulty in our Enlightenment (ātmadnyāna).

If we are born from Īśvara then why is there need for spiritual evolution?

This is very deep question. Most people misunderstand this question and blame Advaita Vedānta as flawed philosophy. This question can be put in this way also "why there is spell of māyā?"

How the sacchidānanda Brahman is trapped in the spell of ignorance/māyā? Or why there is misery in this world?

There are various explanations given to this question. One kind of reasoning suggests that the spell of ignorance (avidya) is anādi (beginningless), so it is not the question of why is it there. It is there because it is there. If a child asks, why the red color is red? Then answer to this question is, red color is red because it is red, if we try to give any reason to redness then that very reason becomes the subject of next question again and we are caught in regressus ad infinitum, therefore, no other answer is possible. Similarly, if we try to answer the question about existence of ignorance then that answer becomes subject of next question and it can go on to infinity, therefore, we should assume that ignorance is there, just as in mathematics we assume that there is something like zero, but in real life there is nothing which can be called as zero.

Another reason can be said that ignorance might be pravāhanitya, means as long as we can go in past; we cannot trace its beginning. However, since it ends one day with the rise of real knowledge it must have started one day. However, it is also true that we cannot trace its beginning therefore we can conclude that it is pravāhanitya.

I think all these problems arise because when we think about Brahman, we come to understanding that it is Nirguna (without any mode or attributes of nature that is satva, raja and tama) and Nirvikāra (un-modifiable). We cannot say that ignorance or māyā has emerged from Brahman by its will because Brahman has no will since it is āptakāmā and ignorance cannot emerge by itself in Brahman since Brahman is un-modifiable. In addition, nothing can trap Brahman without its will. Therefore, it becomes a very serious problem.

My own understanding is, usually we mix two different perspectives about Brahman and therefore we get deluded while thinking about the cause of ignorance. It is true that Brahman is nirvikāra, āptakāma, ātmakāma and the world we experience is just an appearance on Brahman but it is from the standpoint of Pāramārthika Satta (Absolute Reality), in Vyavahārika Satta (Transactional Reality), Brahman (Īśvara) has all powers to give birth to world and get caught in ignorance about itself in the form of Jīva. When we use word "will" or "wish" then we always assume that it must be out of some need and Īśvara has no need because He is self-contained. Then we assume that He cannot give birth to the world.

Yes, it is true that Īśvara has no need, however; Īśvara appears to give birth to world on His own will on Transactional Plane. Īśvara does this (on Transactional Plane) out of ānanda (bliss). Īśvara is full of Consciousness, and not inactive like a rock. Īśvara gives birth to world to play with it and not out of any need. This play is not play like professional players to earn money or anything else, but to play because He has got all energies and liveliness. Therefore, God starts the creation and enters in it in the form of Jīva to experience His own creation. However, trouble starts when this Jīva forgets its real nature as Consciousness and becomes identified with body-mind. This identification of Jīva needs to be evolved to its own nature again to become peaceful.

One more point that is important and has to be understood is that from the standpoint of Brahman or absolute reality (Pāramārthika Sattā) there is no spell of Māyā and there is no one to get deluded by Māyā, there is the existence of Brahman only.

Therefore, the question, that how and why the Brahman gets deluded by Māyā and gets caught in ignorance, has no meaning from the Pāramārthika Sattā because, there is no Māyā, only Brahman. This question has significance only from the stand point of Vyāvahārika Sattā or Transactional reality. We are talking from Transactional reality, therefore, we have to draw inference from the stand point of Transactional reality that world is born out of bliss at some point in past. Its spell ends at the time of destruction of ignorance and spiritual enlightenment about Self and transient nature of Māyā, though Māyā may continue to appear. If we conclude that spell of māyā is beginning less, then it can never end, because then spell of māyā goes beyond the reach of time.

However, time itself is māyā, then how māyā can give birth to itself out of itself, it looks impossible. It is not so, time does not give birth to time or māyā, it gives birth to spell of māyā. Time or māyā both are appearances happening upon Brahman, they are not self existent, when we deeply investigate about māyā or time then we realize that it does not exist, never existed, and will never exist in future (because past, present and future are illusory) also, there is only existence of Consciousness (Brahman) without limit of time and space as eternal now. Then again a question arises that when the appearance of time started to appear upon Brahman? Answer to this question is that the appearance of time is there upon Brahman from limitless past, it is there Now. In this sense māyā or time can be said as beginningless because it is appearing upon the beginningless Brahman. It is going to be there for eternity, however, we as individual Jīva can get out of it or enter it according to the will of Īśvara.

How to get liberated?

There are so many ways to reach to the state of pure Consciousness and still many more ways are possible. But we can divide these ways mainly in four categories; Enlightenment about the nature of Self is the base of all these four.

i) Dnyāna. (Knowledge)

ii) Karmayoga. (To work for the sake of God without thinking so much about the outcome of the work)

iii) Bhakti (Devotion)

iv) Dhyāna (Meditation)

These are four pillars. Vedānta philosophy accommodates all of them. It is based on knowledge, which causes devotion and person does his or her work without worrying about the outcome and ultimately deep meditation happens and the silence spreads in all states of Consciousness. Therefore, the Vedāntic procedure of spiritual Enlightenment is the fast and direct process of liberation.

What is the biggest obstacle in the path of liberation?

Ignorance of our real nature and transient nature of world is the basic problem. Because of ignorance we keep thinking about the past and future and then our continuously working mind becomes the biggest obstacle in the path. Mind becomes powerful because we continue swinging between "Past" and "Future" which are illusory. If we can become rooted in "Present," then there is no trap of mind and we can experience whatever there is in present as sarvam khalu idam bhrahma (really this everything is Brahman). Then we can use our mind more creatively without being trapped into it.

Therefore, most important thing is to get rooted in "NOW". Because "Now" is the only reality, past and future come and go as clouds come and go in the sky but sky always remains untouched, similarly "Now" or "present" always remains untouched from the past and future. This is where Karma Yoga comes to our help. But to follow Karma Yoga one has to be confident that God or Cosmic Order exists. Only then it is possible to do the Karma without worrying about results. There is God who will give us the result of Karma as per our credentials. It is like a student who gives an exam and after writing paper, he or she becomes relaxed because he knows that the examiner will give the marks as per his work. But as atheistic ideology suggests that there is no examiner (God) and if a student is confused whether any examiner of his paper exists or not then obviously he will not be able to concentrate on writing the answer sheet.

This is the reason why I have tried so much in this book to prove the existence of God. We have to be confident that God/Īśvara exists and He will always do the right thing for us. If we can surrender to Īśvara (Cosmic Order – The Intelligence of the Universe) then it is very helpful to be in peace and when the time is right, we can have the experience of Self without any Māyā (Body-Mind). Then we are able to hear the sound of silence. As Zen masters refer to this sound as "sound of one hand clapping" and Indian mystics call it Anāhat Nāda.

The best way (as per my understanding) that takes us to the realization of Self is the knowledge of Self, the method of Advaita Vedānta.

What is ANĀHAT NĀDA?

"Nāsti nādātparo mantrah na devah swātmānah parāh| Nānusandhe parā poojā na hi trupteh param sukham || " — Yogashikhopanishad, Chapter 2

[There is no mantra superior to Nāda, no Deity higher than our own Consciousness. There is no worship loftier than the search for Self and no joy greater than contentment.]

The goal which all the Vedas declare, which all austerities aim at, and which men desire when they lead the life of continence, I will tell you briefly: it is OM. This syllable OM is indeed Brahman. This syllable is the Highest. Whosoever knows this syllable obtains all that he desires. This is the best support; this is the highest support. Whosoever knows this support, is adored in the world of Brahma. -- Katha Upanishad I, ii, 15-17

This sound is very important in spirituality. OMM... is an effort to bring the ANĀHAT NĀDA in human language but ultimately it remains beyond expression. We can hear it but we can't copy it. This sound is called ANĀHAT, ANĀHAT means un-struck. Normally sounds are made by striking of two or more things or air but anāhat sound is not made like this. It is always there vibrating on its own without any effort. When we become still, go beyond mind and start to enter the no-mind state on that boundary we are able to hear this primordial sound of the universe. There is enough information available about this sound in different Upanishads and in works of different saints.

Quotes of Sri Rāmakrushna Paramahansa about AUM:

"The sound OM is Brahman. The rushi-s (sages) practiced austerity to realize that Sound-Brahman. After attaining perfection one hears the sound of this eternal Word rising spontaneously from the navel. "What will you gain", some sages ask, "by merely hearing this sound?" You hear the roar of the ocean from a distance. By following the roar you can reach the ocean. As long as there is the roar, there must also be the ocean. By following the trail of OM you attain Brahman, of which the Word is the symbol. That Brahman has been described by the Vedas as the ultimate goal." -- The Gospel of Sri Rāmakrushna.

Explanation of "Aum" (By Sri Rāmakrushna Paramahansa)

(To Mahima) "You explain 'Aum' with reference to 'a', 'u', and 'm' only."

Mahima: " 'a', 'u', and 'm' mean creation, preservation, and destruction."

Master: "But I give the illustration of the sound of a gong: 'tom', t-o-m. It is the merging of the Lila in the Nitya: the gross, the subtle, and the causal merge in the Great Cause; waking, dream, and deep sleep, merge in Turiya. The striking of the gong is like the falling of a heavy weight into a big ocean. Waves begin to rise: the Relative rises from the Absolute; the causal, subtle, and gross bodies appear out of the Great Cause; from Turiya emerge the states of deep sleep, dream, and waking. These waves arising from the Great Ocean merge again in the Great Ocean. From the Absolute to the Relative, and from the Relative to the Absolute. Therefore, I give the illustration of the gong's sound, 'tom'. I have clearly perceived all these things. It has been revealed to me that there exists an Ocean of Consciousness without limit. From It come all things of the relative plane, and in It they merge again. Millions of Brahmānda-s rise in that Chidākāśa and merge in It again. All this has been revealed to me; I don't know, much about what your books say." -- The Gospel of Sri Rāmakrushna Chapter 33

What happens after death?

Death happens with the body; in this process, we become unconscious. Like in our day to day life when body needs rest then we fall into unconscious sleep. But when mind is working we are able dream. This phenomenon of dream is very interesting. In fact, we should discuss now the states of soul/being/consciousness, what after death? Answer to this question lies in this discussion of these States. These States of Being are: -

Waking State: - This is the state when our body is able to function and is full of energy. We experience the world when we are in waking state. We are conscious of our senses. However, this waking state is the foundation of illusion or spell of Māyā because we get identified with our body and personality in this state. Normally in this state, we feel that we are brain or mind which is located in our head. So delusion happens that we are brain and we are working upon rest of the body but this is fundamentally wrong.

Let's see how. If you ask any doctor then he will tell you that when we think that we are experiencing our body, in fact we are having experience of our brain as our body, that's why when a doctor has to do some major surgery he simply makes our brain asleep and we are cut from our body. In cases of paralysis it is the brain which gets damaged and we lose the sensation in corresponding part of body.

When we get identified with our own body, which is a tool for us or consciousness to play in this world, we forget why we are in the body and start behaving as we are only our body and nothing more. When our body is small we think we are child, when body grows we think we are young and when our body gets old we think we are old and about to die. We project all the attributes of body on Consciousness and attributes (though pure Consciousness is beyond attributes, I am using this word for Consciousness for the sake of understanding as against the attributes of body) of Consciousness on body. It is called as Adhyāsa. Since body cannot survive for long, we get ourselves caught in the false notion of limited time. It creates a great hurry for achieving everything. This hurry destroys the peace in our life. Now we see brain waves patterns during Waking State.

I am mentioning brain wave patterns because during the waking state there are two different patterns of brain waves but normally we call them both as waking state and with waking I will also mention the brain waves of other two states. These wave patterns correspond with the condition of body during different states of Consciousness. When body is active brain generates high frequency waves or we can say that when brain generates high frequency waves body is active. When brain generates low frequency waves body is inactive. To put it more precisely brain waves tell us about the gross body and not about the subtle body. Because in dream subtle body may be completely active but brain waves are lower. Brain waves do not tell us anything about Consciousness because in deep sleep Consciousness is there with all its illumining capacity but brain waves are very low. Therefore, we have to conclude that brain itself is limited to the physical body. It is another proof of independent Consciousness which is not the product of brain.

In waking state brain generates Beta waves which are the first kind. These waves are of low amplitude and high frequency compared to other states. The frequency of Beta waves is between 15 to 40 cycles a second. A person in active conversation or in debate is in Beta.

In the same waking state there is another kind of wave pattern which is called as Alpha. Alpha waves are slower in frequency and higher in amplitude. Their frequency ranges from 9-14 cycles per second. A person who has completed a task and sits down to rest is usually in Alpha state. A person who is meditating is also in this state of alpha.

Dreaming state: - Have you ever thought that who really experiences the dream? Because our whole body with which we can experience anything is asleep. Our outer senses become useless when we go into dream.

But still mind becomes the object in dream and consciousness remains as watcher. In dream we can see, hear, touch, smell and can do all other activities without having any sense of gross body working. We don't pay attention to dream otherwise only dream can liberate us from the grip of bondage. Dream shows that there is another subtle body which has all senses that we have in our gross body. At the time of death this subtle body collects all senses and mind with it and leaves the gross body. Until the time of death these senses remain entangled with gross body. We can also say that gross body works as a mold for next life (the new gross body which we get after the death of current body) in which our senses of next life are created and that next body again creates senses for next life. This molding of senses or in other words molding of consciousness happens according to our obsessions. If we are obsessed with food then our subtle body gets molded in such a way that the next gross body will help us to fulfill our desire for food, then that can be any animal body who goes on eating for all day. Similarly, if we are obsessed with sex then our subtle body gets molded in a way that the next gross body will help us to fulfill our desire for sex, then that body can be the body of an animal, which can perform sex for hours. If a man is obsessed with women then he can become woman in next life, similarly if a woman is obsessed with men then she can become man in next life. Desire for women can make us woman because woman is a life form, desire for food would not make us food, because food is not a life form. If our desire is for any living being then we can get body of that living being but if our desire is for something inert then we can get the body which will help us to enjoy that inert thing more deeply. Here I have used some gross examples for the sake of understanding; the original process is very complex because no one is obsessed with only one thing, there can be many obsessions in man's life. Therefore, Indian scriptures say that whichever desire is present at the time of death we attain that kind of body in the next life, because the desire at the time of death is the strongest desire of life. Now we see the brain waves pattern during Dreaming State:-

Brain waves in the dreaming state are called as Theta. They have greater amplitude than Alpha and lower frequency than Alpha. This frequency range is between 5-8 cycles a second. These kinds of waves are also possible in deep meditation. This state is very creative and full of new ideas. If anyone is able to penetrate awareness in this state with meditation then it is called as Lucid Dreaming.

Deep Sleep: - This state of deep sleep or complete unconsciousness is possible only because of our attachment with our physical body and the world we are living in. Otherwise, we don't need to become unconscious. Because of our attachment, nature is not able to recharge our body. That's why nature puts a curtain of unconsciousness on us to recharge and repair our body. After our body is recharged completely slowly mind starts functioning and we start experiencing dreams, and later our body comes out of sleep. We are unconscious in deep sleep but still a thread of consciousness remains intact that is why we can recall our dreams after waking up and if we do not have dreams then also we can recall the absence of dreams. That thread of Consciousness is called as Turiya, the fourth leg of Brahman. Let us see the brain waves patterns during Deep Sleep: -

This final brainwave state is Delta. Here the brainwaves are of the greatest amplitude and slowest frequency. This frequency range is between 0.5-4 cycles a second.

What is Near Death Experience?

Simple answer to this is-NDE is the experience which some people report they had when they were close to death but are saved by doctors. It is the period of coma which encompasses the individual when he or she is in life threatening situation. In this period one can experience sensations like getting away from the body, levitation, feeling of love, presence of light etc.

These kinds of experiences have been increased due to recent techniques of resuscitation in cardiac arrest patients. As always materialist scientists try to reduce this kind of experience by giving atheistic explanations like lack of oxygen and hallucination etc. But on the other hand there are many people including renowned scientists who don't agree with any kind of materialistic approach and consider NDE as a proof of afterlife. Currently there are many studies available on this subject. Major researchers in this subject are Pim Van Lommel a cardiologist from Netherlands and Sam Parnia from Southampton University.

Researcher Lakhmir Chawla a professor at George Washington University argues that NDEs occur because of lack of oxygen in brain which triggers a surge of electrical activity. But Sam Parnia disputed this claim saying Chawla had not provided any proof for his claim and what the patients were experiencing during the period of high electrical activity, since all the patients in his experiment died. Raymond Moody founder of International Association for Near-Death Studies (IANDS) has written a book "Life after Life" where he has mentioned significant amount of NDEs.

Some scientists argue that it is possible to generate experiences like NDEs through stimulating neurons which causes memories that can't be differentiated from real. However, simulating something in lab does not prove that the real is false. In the same way, producing events, like NDE or Out of Body experiences in labs by confusing brain's neural networks, does not prove that such experiences are false in real life also.

Van Lommel Studies (From Wikipedia)

The first clinical study of near-death experiences (NDEs) in cardiac arrest patients was by Pim van Lommel, a cardiologist from the Netherlands, and his team (The Lancet, 2001). Of 344 patients, who were successfully resuscitated after suffering cardiac arrest, 62 (18%) expressed an intraoperative memory and among these, 41 (12%) experienced core NDEs, which included out-of-body experiences. According to Lommel, the patients remembered details of their conditions during their cardiac arrest despite being clinically dead with flat lined brain stem activity. Van Lommel concluded that his findings supported the theory that consciousness continued despite lack of neuronal activity in the brain. Van Lommel conjectured that continuity of consciousness may be achievable if the brain acted as a receiver for the information generated by memories and consciousness, which existed independently of the brain, just as radio, television and internet information existed independently of the instruments that received it.

Van Lommel et al., reported that 62 of the 344 patients with cardiac arrest reported some recollection. Of these 62, 50% reported an awareness or sense of being dead, 24% said that they had had an out-of-body experience, 31% recalled moving through a tunnel, whilst 32% described meeting with deceased people. Moreover, while near-death experiencers commonly report feelings of peace and bliss, only 56% associated the experience with such positive emotions. No patients reported a distressing or frightening NDE. Other than this there are some interesting NDEs also. In some cases patients in coma have identified people who were around them while they were in coma. In some cases people have identified the doctors who operated on them and described the procedures of operation. If these incidents are true then no scientific explanation can be enough to explain NDEs.

Altered States of Consciousness: - If anybody takes some drugs and then goes into trance like condition then it is called as altered state of consciousness. These kinds of experiences include out of body experiences. Not only by drugs but these kinds of experiences are also possible in laboratories by using some camera tricks. I have read somewhere that a scientist gave some drugs to a subject which led to dimming of body awareness of that subject and then showed him backside of his head which was shoot by camera from rare side of the person. After watching his own backside the subject who was under influence of drug thought he was experiencing OBE. These kinds of childish tricks played by scientists don't beat the real OBEs (Out of Body Experiences). Real OBEs don't occur under any influence of drug but they happen spontaneously when somebody becomes mature enough to tackle with them.

Is Rebirth or Reincarnation possible?

Yes, there are ample evidences of rebirth but if someone wants to be sure then only answer is to experience death consciously. If anybody is able to transcend death and come back then he is going to be the proof at least for himself.

Why people behave strangely?

That is the nature of people as they are today. They are completely unconscious so they don't understand what they are doing. If you want to come out of this frustration then you should surrender to Īśvara, only then you will be able to see people's behavior and their intoxication from a safe distance. After that you will not be angry at them. Surrender brings awareness with it, which is helpful to overcome our own bad habits and to observe people's behavior also.

Why we become Unconscious in sleep?

We have discussed this question above in the explanation of sleep, but I repeat it again. It is our ego and attachment which makes us unconscious, nature has to draw curtain of unconsciousness over Jīva to recharge body. If there is no unconsciousness of sleep in our routine day to day life, then we will never be able to relax and our body will die very early. However, in sleep also our self-luminous nature is intact.

Discussion with a friend about possibility of soul

(It is a casual but useful discussion for beginners; this discussion does not contain perfect Advaita view because its aim is to make the friend theist from an atheist, Advaita can be discussed after one comes out of the atheist mindset. By atheist mindset I don't mean analytical mindset, I mean the rigidness of being knowledgeable without having enough knowledge. In this discussion actually there are three people, one is complete atheist and second is dualist. I don't know both of them personally because this discussion took place on internet.)

Friend (atheist): - It is a fairly typical belief of the religious that the soul is eternal and it is in this way our consciousness survives death. If this is the case then it would seem that we ought to have consciousness prior to our birth, our physical existence. However, I do suspect that I am not alone in not remembering before I was born. But then how can my soul be eternal when it has missed over 14.6 billion years of eyistence? At best the soul is eternal minus 14.6 billion years. If the soul is understood in relation to consciousness then it patently cannot be eternal. The other possibility: there is no soul.

And of our consciousness, at which point of its development or in which state does it enter the afterlife? Is it the childhood "I", the adult "I", the old aged "I" or could it even be our consciousness in the final state in which it exists within our physical body? It is a worthwhile consideration, for many who die will no doubt die while at their most knowledgeable and at-peace state. Such a system would be favorable to those described.

But for others to enter the afterlife in this state would be disastrous. For it is not difficult to imagine an enlightened genius who has a car accident and for all intents and purposes becomes a vegetable (goes in vegetative state). Should this damaged consciousness enter the afterlife this seems more of a punishment than a reward.

We could also imagine someone who suffers amnesia, lives for a brief period following and then dies. It would be at best peculiar for the latter state of consciousness to survive death.

And if a child dies, should it exist forever as a child with all that entails e.g. underdeveloped faculties? Again, this is not the happy ever after ending that most passive theists envisage, but it is the implication of their seemingly benign wider beliefs.

The problems surrounding the notion of the eternal soul seem almost insurmountable. At the very least the extraordinary claim requires some extraordinary evidence. From the theists this evidence is not forthcoming. The concept of the eternal soul currently asks more questions than it answers. Of course this is likely to remain so, as it is predicated on the highly improbable existence of a creative, always and everywhere observant, personal and interventionist deity.

Second friend (dualist): -"If the soul is understood in relation to consciousness then it patently cannot be eternal." - In my opinion we cannot look at the Soul/Spirit as consciousness. The Soul/Spirit is the eternal existing life-force. That energy which allows my fingers to run across the keyboard now and the same energy which makes my kitten run around the house. We cannot fully explain it because we lack the words for it. The Spirit and the Spirit World are beyond this three dimensional perspective thus, they cannot be explained because they stand outside of Reason.

"The other possibility: there is no soul." - Always a possibility - we could just be a computer program, I guess.

"The extraordinary claim requires some extraordinary evidence" - Those who seek evidence can find it on their own. I would be happy to help if you wish - I promise nothing though: we all have our own specific paths in this mysterious Life. : )

"Highly improbable existence of a creative, always and everywhere observant, personal and interventionist deity" - I agree here and I will quote Oscar Wilde by saying that: "the truth is rarely pure and never simple".

Me:- In my opinion you are misunderstanding so many things. First we have to understand what the concept of Consciousness is. All people scientists, doctors, spiritual people all accept that there is consciousness in us that responds to the outer stimuli. Only question is what it is born of, one thought says that it is born out of matter. First there is matter then it gives birth to energy and energy gives birth to Consciousness. But in fact all scientific evidence says that matter is not first but energy is first and it gives birth to matter, matter is a form of condensed energy. Now we understand that matter and energy are not different things but they are the two sides of same coin. There is no evidence of matter or energy having any intelligence like Consciousness has, for example we humans and other living creatures are having intelligent mind which can respond to situations. Some people say that it is a program in dead matter or energy which behaves intelligently. There is no answer to this question from the point of consciousness. But as we in India see that these are the two ways of looking at same thing. For example if there is a Lotus flower in Mud then reductionist ideology says that it is only mud which has transferred itself in Lotus flower like they say that matter has transferred itself in Consciousness, but other opinion says if we can have a Lotus flower out of mud then it was always there potentially hidden in mud. In fact mud is also divine which can give birth to Lotus flower. Same way if we are experiencing Consciousness in this world of Matter and Energy then it is obvious that consciousness was always there hiding in the matter and energy because if it was not there then how can it manifest latter?

And as far as missing the journey of 14 billion years journey is concerned then I say you have not missed it. You have existed with all journey of this existence even before the time started. But in a different form that's why you don't remember it. And in any way we can't have our memory as criterion of our existence because we forget most of our childhood in our old age but that does not mean we never had any childhood.

You ask that at which point of its development Consciousness enters next life and other such questions. But you are misunderstanding things, Consciousness never enters any life form but it only experiences it (here by word Consciousness I mean the illumining factor of every experience, not the faculties that develop with our age). Consciousness is always beyond every life form. If an enlightened being enters any life form then that being enjoys that life form, but for that you have to have the taste of enlightenment before that you should not talk about something which you don't know.

Friend: - Now you make quite a lot of big claims there. And as Carl Sagan suggested, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Your claims may indeed be correct, but without seeing the evidence or reasoning behind them, I cannot accept their truth.

Firstly you say that "You have existed with all journey of this existence even before the time started". But you have provided no proof for this truly remarkable claim. Not content with one extraordinary revelation, you continue "But in a different form that's why you don't remember it". You do see that these are incredible claims, that require proof if to be accepted?

And again there is a scientific claim made without evidence - "Consciousness never enters any life form but it only experiences it."

One more for good measure "Consciousness is always beyond any life form".

I have been given no reason to accept any of these claims. You have merely stated their truth. All of this makes for potential irony when you state "you should not talk about something which you don't know." My own article, let us remember is asking questions, it is a rational inquiry that does not pretend to "know" or have the answers. The few occasions where I do make truth claims, I show my reasoning and don't merely state truths.

As for your first paragraph, perhaps something is lost in translation, but I am struggling to see the relevance or understand your points. But I can answer your main point "if it was not there then how can it manifest latter"? It's a simple thing called evolution. What Darwin did was explain how you can start with real simplicity and by the process of natural selection end up with beings of great complexity with consciousness and rationality: the human being. To say that if something is there it was always there is classical but ultimately flawed, discredited and disproved Aristotelian logic

Me:- first we have to understand what evidence is? What kind of evidence are you asking for? Can't you see life all around us? You say it is evolution and natural choice of creature. But in the first place you have to accept that something is evolving. There is something right from the beginning which is evolving. If there is nothing constant then evolution is not possible. Because with the death of one creature all its needs and experiences will vanish and new creature would need to have same experiences of life and they will also die with same problems as earlier creatures die. But we can see clearly that when there are problem in living in one specie's life then after few births in that species they find solution to the problem. It means something constant is living through them, which get the answer to problems after few lives. And anyway Darwin can't give explanation of all life around us through just one theory of evolution and natural choice. If it is right then how you give explanation of venom in snakes? Which logic can give you answer to this? There are so many kinds of fishes who give birth to their children and left them forever but those little fish do the same journey accurately without guidance, I can give you so many examples which are impossible to explain with evolution theory.

You are asking for proof, now you have to understand that you can't have proof because you are it. You are Consciousness. And anything which you can see, touch, smell, taste or see is not you, it is other than you, it is matter, and so only you are proof of yourself. You can feel your presence in deep meditation. But if you keep asking for proofs then you will never go in deep meditation.

Friend: - Of course I see life all around us. I see real existing physical things. That is proof of real existing physical things. It is not evidence of immaterial souls. It is completely illogical to say I see P, therefore Q exists. It just does not follow. And this is what you are doing I am afraid.

You say "But in the first place you have to accept that something is evolving. There is something right from the beginning which is evolving." There is quite a lot to say on this as it is quite flabbergasting. I am probably not the best person for the job and would advise you to just watch an online lecture on evolution; there are any number on you tube, but something academic like Professor Dawkins. How I ought to respond would depend on what you mean by "in the first place" and "from the beginning", do you mean the beginning of the universe, the beginning of life or prior to both?

I have to quote you at length here "Because with the death of one creature all its needs and experiences will vanish and new creature would need to have same experiences of life and they will also die with same problems as earlier creatures die. But we can see clearly that when there are problem in living in one species life then after few births in that species they find solution to the problem. It means something constant is living through them which gets the answer to problem after few lives". This is a bizarre understanding. You are implying that one dog dies, its soul enters a dog that is born and this accounts for a species improving and evolving. I'll tell you what is constant: DNA. It is the non-random selection of genetic material. This is also what explains things like venom in snakes. Evolution explains the apparent miracles of nature. Again, I say watch some lectures on evolution, your questions will be answered in great detail. The things you think disprove evolution are the very things which prove evolution. You just have to understand evolution first.

Finally, I agree I am proof of consciousness. But I do not and have not claimed that there is no consciousness. There clearly is consciousness. It is the claim that consciousness lasts forever that I am taking issue with.

Me:- Wait, you are asking me to see lectures of some intellectual people in favor of evolution. But you have to understand that I can also ask you to watch lectures of same kind of intellectual people against evolution. If we are investigating some issue then we should consider both sides not just one. If you think the people you are mentioning, are only (like someone Mr. Dawkins) people who are intelligent enough to explain this whole life and its cause then you are looking at only one side of the coin. So far we are talking about life logically and logic is very tricky, it plays in the hands of intelligent people. More intelligent anyone is there is more chance of that person winning the debate. But that does not solve fundamental problem. What is the truth?

You say "This is a bizarre understanding. You are implying that one dog dies, its soul enters a dog that is born and this account for a species improving and evolving. I'll tell you what is constant: DNA. It is the non-random selection of genetic material." you are getting me wrong. I have not said that one dog dies and its soul enters another dog. You say DNA is evolving. DNA is a tool in the hands of Consciousness and as the need of Consciousness DNA gets changed (I have accepted evolution here just for the sake of argument otherwise still it is not proven). It is true that DNA is evolving but for whom it is evolving? Do you see any need for matter to evolve since it is already completely matter and whatever it becomes through evolution it still remains Matter. Now as far as your dog's example is concerned, all life forms are tools for Consciousness, after death of one dog it's soul does not enter in another dog, in fact soul always remains in Consciousness, it only watches the different forms from there.

In the end I am happy that you are at least accepting that you are a proof of Consciousness. Now the only question is what is your nature? Is it material or immaterial? You have to look that in the very experience of Matter other than you, you are getting this glimpse that you are not matter. Because to have experience of anything there has to be some contrast. If you are also a part of Matter around you then you will never able to experience this world around us which is made of Material things.

One more thing, the very idea to ask proof of God like other scientific evidences is childish. You say so many gaps which we used to fill with God, science has given explanation to so many gaps and sometime in future science will explain everything. Yes it is true to a certain extent, but you have to see other side also, science has given us explanations but it has also made things more difficult. For example, in past man was used to call water just as 'water'. Now we can explain water as H2O, 2 hydrogen and 1 oxygen. In first glance it looks pretty nice that we have been able to understand water more deeply. But if someone asks what hydrogen is and what is oxygen then obvious answer is hydrogen is hydrogen and oxygen is oxygen. In past we had only one thing "water" which we did not know, now there are two things which we don't know. One is "hydrogen" and second is "oxygen". You may call this scientific evolution but we call this nonsense. And same thing is happening in latest discovery of Boson Particle. In past scientists used to call atom as ultimate discovery in physics and atom as explanation of this world. Today they are calling God particle (Higgs Boson) as the explanation of this world. But it is very much possible that in future may be after 100 years the same kind of scientists will say that Higgs Boson is not the right explanation. You may say that science never claims to be perfect and it always evolves to better and better explanations but one has to understand simple thing that no matter how much we try, we will never come to Zero, our search for truth will always remain as it is today, because something is always going to be there which we will not be able to explain. Then we have to think are we searching in right direction or not?

(I did not get any response from my friend after this, so this discussion ends here.)

In the discussion above we have missed some points from the arguments of the friend. Therefore below I am repeating those arguments and stating their counter arguments.

Points that have been missed during the talk: -

Friend says, "If this is the case then it would seem that we ought to have consciousness prior to our birth, our physical existence. However, I do suspect that I am not alone in not remembering before I was born. But then how can my soul be eternal when it has missed over 14.6 billion years of existence? At best the soul is eternal minus 14.6 billion years." This is the complete misunderstanding of fact. Consciousness is eternal, which means it is beyond time and space. The counting of 14.6 billion years is useless from the standpoint of Consciousness because for Consciousness time does not exist. Whenever we come to this world we experience it as 'Now', past and future are mere imaginations. Time exists inside Māyā, time itself is Māyā, from the standpoint of Brahman there is no time, and it is always 'Now'. To understand it more clearly we can take the example of deep sleep (Sushupti), when we are in deep sleep we transcend time and space therefore whenever we wake up from sleep we don't know how much time has passed and feel that I had just went to sleep and wake up quickly, however in reality a whole night is passed. Same thing happens when someone is in coma, that person cannot know how much time has passed since he has gone in coma and thinks that he has awaken just in few minutes, while months might have gone. So the counting of 14.6 billion years is illusion happening inside the Māyā, it is not true from the stand point of Brahman because there is no time for Brahman.

Further friend says, "And of our consciousness, at which point of its development or in which state does it enter the afterlife? Is it the childhood "I", the adult "I", the old aged "I" or could it even be our consciousness in the final state in which it exists within our physical body? It is a worthwhile consideration, for many who die will no doubt die while at their most knowledgeable and at- peace state. Such a system would be favorable to those described. But for others to enter the afterlife in this state would be disastrous. For it is not difficult to imagine an enlightened genius who has a car accident and for all intents and purposes becomes a vegetable (goes in vegetative state). Should this damaged consciousness enter the afterlife this seems more of a punishment than a reward." Again it shows the misunderstanding of reality. He is looking from the standpoint of waking state only. He forgets that even in vegetative state that person may be dreaming of being continuously active. The body of next life depends on the state of subtle body and as I mentioned before the way it is molded by the obsessions of that person. The next body does not depend upon the condition of gross body at the time of death; rather it depends on the condition of mind.

Next, another friend says, "In my opinion we cannot look at the Soul/Spirit as consciousness. The Soul/Spirit is the eternal existing life-force. That energy which allows my fingers to run across the keyboard now and the same energy which makes my kitten run around the house. We cannot fully explain it because we lack the words for it. The Spirit and the Spirit World are beyond this three dimensional perspective thus, they cannot be explained because they stand outside of Reason." If we take unconsciousness as substratum of everything then we cannot explain the presence of world, because unconsciousness is non-existent. It leads us towards the nihilist philosophy. Why I am saying unconsciousness as non-existent, because to consider unconsciousness entity as existent goes against our experience and logic. Logical inference is unconsciousness entity cannot give birth to the sentient beings, because it lacks the intelligent foresight which is necessary to maintain this gigantic world. Further our experience also suggests that we cannot decide about the existence of unconscious entities other than perceiver, because when we go into sleep the world gets changed till we come back, this momentary existence and the change itself shows non-existence, because existence cannot change with time. If it changes then we cannot have experience of two moments one after another, because to know the second moment as subsequent of first, the knower has to be constant without changing with the moments. Therefore, we cannot say that spirit is not Consciousness; if it is unconsciousness then it can never experience anything since it would be non-existent.

Again friend says, "Of course I see life all around us. I see real existing physical things. That is proof of real existing physical things. It is not evidence of immaterial souls. It is completely illogical to say I see P, therefore Q exists. It just does not follow. And this is what you are doing I am afraid." In world we see not only physical things but living things also. All plants, animals and humans are living things while earth, water, air, fire, and sky are physical things. We should not confuse physical things with living things. Living things are not like physical things, living things have awareness of their existence, they can feel heat and cold, they have emotions. Physical things or non-living things do not have anything described above. When I say life, I do not mean non-living matter but I mean living entities that are capable of giving response to outer stimuli.

In the end friend says, "Finally, I agree I am proof of consciousness. But I do not and have not claimed that there is no consciousness. There clearly is consciousness. It is the claim that consciousness lasts forever that I am taking issue with." Yes it is true that all people including extreme atheists accept that Consciousness exists, only the nature of Consciousness is the real issue which has not been settled yet and I think it will remain unsettled forever. However, my understanding is once we accept that Consciousness is different from matter the issue of its nature is also settled. When we say Consciousness is not material force then we can easily infer that the rules that apply to matter do not apply to it. Matter is born and it dies in other words it is bound by time, this rule cannot apply to Consciousness because it is not matter. Similarly matter is bound by space; this rule also, cannot apply to something which is not material thing. Few people argue that though consciousness is not matter however it can emerge from material forces. To accept or reject this claim, we have to investigate about the nature of matter and we have to define it. Matter is a thing which does not respond to outer stimuli, which has not awareness of its existence. Material thing cannot think about its future and plan according to the thinking. How am I stating all these characteristics of matter, because we can see clearly all around us two kinds of things, first kind is material things who do not move on their own, who do not react if we hit them with another material thing. On the other hand second kind of things is living things who move on their own and react to outer situation. These two do not have any causal relationship in them, we do not see any rock giving birth to another rock which moves on its own and reacts. We always see that whenever a living thing is born, it is born through another living thing. We also see that living things become dead matter when life inside them leaves, but material things cannot become alive until they are gone through a process of food chain in the living things (though material things themselves cannot become alive, by going through the process of food chain material things become useful to maintain the physical bodies of living things). Material things have to go through a long process of food chain to become alive but living things can become dead without any such long process. This clearly indicates that there is another force which coverts dead matter into living things systematically; to make thing alive, needs foresight and systematic arrangements of different natural forces. Matter itself cannot do this kind of foresightful arrangements because as we saw before that by definition matter lacks such intelligence. Therefore, we have to conclude that matter and Consciousness are two different forces and they do not have any causal relationship between them. Therefore we can conclude that Consciousness is not a material thing, it does not emerge from any process of material forces, and it exists independent of matter. This clearly shows that it is not bound by space-time which acts on the matter. Further if we accept the reasoning of Advaita then it clearly states the independence of Consciousness from space-time on the basis of three different states that Consciousness experiences and in each state space-time is different, not same. In deep sleep space-time does not exist at all. In such situation there is no question of Consciousness becoming bound by space-time because it can exist without space-time, on the other hand matter cannot exist without space-time.

Here end all the critical points that friend raised in his inquiry. I have not met him again because this discussion took place on hub pages, a public discussion forum and soon after this discussion I was cut from internet for many days so neither he nor I could contact each other. However if someone after reading this discussion wants to state some points from the friend's side then I always welcome such a person.

Back to Top

Is it possible to do something against Īśvara's will?

To do something against Īśvara's will, is also the will of Īśvara, so how can we go out of His will. As going out of sky is impossible, willing something other than Īśvara is also impossible because we are tiny manifestations of Īśvara and whatever we "will", ultimately it is Īśvara's will. Real difference is if we act with awareness or unawareness (it also depends upon Īśvara's will). We cannot imagine or experience anything that is not Īśvara and exist independent of Him because this kind of imagination will make Īśvara limited in power and presence. Therefore, whenever we infer Īśvara, we infer Him as omnipresence and almighty. In such a situation the evil that we experience in world is also under the authority of Īśvara. Creation and destruction both are done by Īśvara.

If everything happens by Īśvara's will then how can we refer something as 'wrong'?

Right and wrong belong to the realm of duality, from the view point of Absolute, there is nothing wrong. However, to live on the plane of Transactional Reality we have to do 'right' things only (this is the will of Īśvara) then we can live a happy and peaceful life. If you want a disturbed and chaotic life with agitation and unhappiness or misery, pain then you can do 'wrong' things and face the consequences. However, if you have done something wrong to somebody unknowingly and if you have repentance of your doing, then you will not have to face any consequence of your doing, only try to be 'aware' in future and do not do the same mistake again.

Is everything planned by Brahman?

Īśvara on absolute plane (Brahman) does not do anything with any effort, because nothing happens or we can say that everything happens spontaneously. On the Transactional plane, everything is planned and known by Īśvara, not Brahman. Brahman is the name given to the absolute reality where nothing else exist to plan and to know, except Brahman itself.

On transactional plane also, everything is planned means all rules of life are set by Īśvara. Nature works under the guidance of Īśvara, however, Īśvara does not need to look into every small matter of life because natural laws take care of it. Īśvara only interferes for His devotees and no one else.

Can we establish Advaita through logic or is it only established by scriptures (Sruti)?

Advaita (Non-duality) can also be proved by logic as Śankarāchārya himself states in his commentary over Māndukya Upanishad Gaudapāda's Kārikā – "Now it is asked whether non-duality can be proved by reasoning as well. It is said in reply that it is possible to establish non-duality by reasoning as well." (Gaudapāda's Kārikā on Māndukya Upanishad Chapter 3, introduction by Śankarāchārya.)

Do we have free will?

There is free will to a limited extent. As a cow tied with a rope is free to move around inside the length of rope but not beyond. Similarly, we all are free to move inside the length of our prārabdha, not beyond. As we can see that our own birth and death is not in our hands but depends upon our karma, therefore we can easily conclude that when the beginning (birth) and end (death) is not in our hands then how middle (life) can be in our hands. All our activities, our nature, our mindset, all is decided by the surroundings we get, and our surroundings depend upon our birth, therefore we have to conclude that we do not have absolute free will, but a limited free will inside our fate. However, there is inherent need of protection from adverse situations, which is there in the nature of Consciousness. No circumstances can change it. Other important inherent feelings are the longing for happiness, knowledge and love. We can see that even all the animals have these feelings of enthusiasm, need for love and protection.

So, we should take these four basic characteristics (protection, knowledge, love, happiness) as part of absolute free will of Consciousness. These feelings cannot be altered by birth, surroundings, mindsets and death. We should therefore try to know our real nature (longing for this knowledge is also free will), only then we can flourish to our best possibility.

Without free will how can we make any progress in spirituality?

It happens by itself, it is not a doing but it is a happening. We do not need to worry about progress on the path of spirituality, we should simply go on living life, and maturity comes with experiences of life, not by our will. Spirituality is the peak of maturity. In addition as I mentioned above in the answer about free will we should try to know the reality and this inherent urge for knowledge takes us ahead and ahead in spirituality.

What is meaning of surrender?

Surrender means floating with stream of life effortlessly, without having any doubt in mind that where life is taking us. Even if life takes us to death then also we should try to be calm, this is the real meaning of surrender.

Can we become enlightened through Bhakti?

Bhakti itself does not bring enlightenment. Bhakti can be done in two ways, first ignorant Bhakti and second knowledgeable Bhakti (Dnyānottara Bhakti). Ignorant Bhakti means devotion that is offered before enlightenment, and knowledgeable Bhakti means devotion after enlightenment.

In fact, Bhakti is the real destination of Advaita, to the extent that the devotee does not remain separate from his deity, in the end of ignorant devotion the devotee and his deity become one, Advaita. After such merging or realizing the oneness real Bhakti happens. However, when a devotee is ignorant then the Īśvara helps him to reach the source of knowledge in every possible way. Dnyānayoga helps to realize the oneness of deity and devotee.

How to destroy the ego?

As ego rises by itself because of ignorance in the same way it is destroyed by itself out of awareness and knowledge. If someone tries to destroy ego then that is also going to be an act of ego so we should only surrender to God and wait patiently. In fact, the act of surrendering can also be the act of ego, so in reality there is no way to destroy ego, as it is born by itself, one day it gets destroyed by itself. Anything done to destroy it makes it stronger, because the act of doing by any doer (ego) is the basic problem.

Being Brahman myself How can I am unaware of it?

It is because we get identified with body and mind. We think ourselves as body and forget our real nature as Brahman. It is like wearing a dress and thinking it as the self. But not knowing does not change our nature, no matter what we think about ourselves we are always Brahman.

Another important factor is, to know ourselves as Brahman, we have to forget ourselves and look into the body-mind and realize our real nature as 'not-body mind' (neti neti). It is like if we want to see the face, then rather than looking at face directly, we look into mirror. Also the metaphor of eye can be used to realize the answer of this question. As eye sees everything but eye cannot see itself, if we want to see the eye we have to look into the mirror. Similarly, we have to identify ourselves with transitory body-mind to realize our eternal nature. It is the only way possible for Consciousness to experience its own glory and brilliance, to compare with something which is not as brilliant or glorious as it is, because Consciousness cannot experience itself directly. I do not mean that we cannot be aware of our real nature, we can, however we cannot realize its infinity, and eternal nature if we do not compare with the objects which have opposite nature than Consciousness. This is called as līla.

What is the understanding of Advaita about the almighty God?

Advaita accepts that God/Īśvara exist as the Creator, maintainer and destroyer IN Transactional Reality. To accomplish this action the one Īśvara is supposed to have three different manifestations.

The creator God is called as Lord Brahmadeva, who represents Rajoguna, of prakruti (nature). The God who maintains the creation of Brahmadeva is called as Lord Vishnu, who represents the Sattvaguna. And finally the God who destroys everything at the time of pralaya is called as Lord Shankar, who represents the tamoguna of nature. These three gods are personification of nature's creative and destructive forces. These forces are conscious because the absolute Consciousness is behind them; this absolute Consciousness is the original Īśvara, as Lord Krushna tells in Bhagavad Gītā "mayyādhyakshena prakruti sūyate sacharācharam". It means the nature operates under the guidance of Īśvara. Therefore, in this world the Īśvara is the Supreme Ruler.

However, from the stand point of Absolute reality there is no world, hence, no Īśvara/God to rule it.

Back to Top

What is good and bad action according to Karma yoga?

To follow karma yoga we have to undertake only good actions. Karma yoga is not possible in bad actions/work. However, the definition of good and bad actions depends upon the situations. Lord Krushna advised Arjuna to kill the enemies on the battle field. Usually killing is supposed to be bad action. Arjuna killed his enemies on battle field and still he was a karma yogi. So it is not easy to decide what is good and what is bad, it depends upon the situations. The important thing is we should surrender to Īśvara, and then He helps us to realize right and wrong according to situation.

What should I do if someone is trying to kill me, according to karma yoga should I save myself or not?

First we have to understand that we never get killed, it is the body which can be killed. Therefore, do not think someone is killing you. As far as the question of saving body is concern, then again it is relative. It depends upon ones decision at the time of the assault. If one thinks his body, if it is kept alive, is useful for all people including him then one should save it, and if the body has become old or useless for any reason then there is no need to save the body.

Is it right to kill the killer to save my body?

These are all hypothetical questions and in fact there is no need to think answers in much detail for such questions. Here again the answer depends upon the situations. Self defense is everyone's birth right so there is nothing wrong to save our own body. However, there is no need to kill the killer because there may be other possible ways and they should be explored first. We can run away from killer, if it is not possible then we can make him handicap for the moment, if it is also not possible then we can try and make him unconscious and so on. If we are a jīvanmukta person then probably we will let the killer kill our body because life or death does not matter for such a person. However, if body can be used for the benefit of all jīva-s and the killer's body is not so useful since he might be a bad person who unnecessarily torture others (since he wants to kill us, he cannot be called as a good man) then we should kill the killer in self-defense.

Should we study various books to understand Advaita or shall we study only one book like Bhagavad Gītā

My understanding is we should study as many books as possible as a part of manana because if we keep studying only one book then it is very much possible that we may misunderstand it. Srīmad Bhagavad Gītā is an excellent book and has supreme authority in tradition of Advaita, however Lord Krushna has not discussed different issues in detail, He has only instructed Arjuna about reality and Arjuna has accepted it without much doubt because Arjuna has accepted Lord Krushna as his Guru and they both did not have much time to clear doubts in the mind of Arjuna since they were on battlefield. Therefore, to have clear understanding of Advaita we should study various books because different issues are explained differently in different books and there is less possibility of misunderstanding after such thorough study.

What is the difference between the death of an ignorant man and death of an enlightened man?

I personally do not have experience of death until now, so I cannot tell you how it feels and in future when I get the experience of death then it will be almost impossible to come back and tell you. I can only tell you my understanding of death while living the life. I think the gross body dies and the pure impersonal 'I' which is neither body nor mind survives the death with the subtle body and causal body. How I have come to this understanding is the only subject of this book, therefore I request readers to re-read this book for the answer of this kind of question.

Does one experience only happiness after enlightenment?

No, happiness and unhappiness belong to this world of duality, which is mithyā, however, it is not non-existent. Even after enlightenment, one keeps on experiencing same world of happiness and unhappiness. Only difference between unenlightened person and enlightened person is that the former thinks world as ultimate reality and try to achieve only happiness by avoiding all unhappiness, while, enlightened person understands that happiness and unhappiness are two sides of same coin therefore he transcend both of them and stays in peace. He looks at both happiness and unhappiness by remaining aloof, without taking interest in happiness and without trying to avoid unhappiness. Therefore, we can conclude that after enlightenment (and after taming the mind by sādhana chatushtaya) one experiences only peace not 'only happiness'.

If everything is Brahman then why Vedānta teaches neti neti?

It is because through our limited vision we usually see things separately, this kind of misunderstanding intensely happens when we identify ourselves with particular body and mind and think that body-mind is separate from whole world. This kind of feeling of separation has to be removed first; therefore, Vedānta teaches us the technique of neti neti. Ultimately when everything is refused as being independent and separate from each other, then everything is accepted as a whole. The teaching of neti neti leads to the refusal of everything as independent entity, when we realize ourselves as devoid of 'anything', simultaneously we realize ourselves as encompassing 'everything' because there is no void where we can take our stand after refusal of everything, therefore, in the end we have to admire everything as Brahman, there is no other way. Neti Neti is a teaching technique of Vedānta, in it initially everything is taken away as separate things and later everything is given back as a whole.

Can Advaita provide me some relief from my addiction of alcohol?

As I see, addiction cannot be removed instantly by any discourse or suggestions. I will request you to consult some doctor who can suggest you medicines that can help your mind to overcome the addiction of alcohol. As far as Advaita is concerned, the process of enlightenment is a very long procedure and can take years (tradition says even lives) to accomplish. In addition, one cannot accomplish the job of contemplation under the influence of alcohol. Meditation might help you to overcome your addiction; however consulting a doctor is more preferable.

Back to Top

How Advaita looks at near-death experiences?

From the standpoint of pure Consciousness, any kind of experience belongs to the realm of Transactional level, then no matter whether it is before death, near death or after death. Consciousness is never born and it never dies so it is useless to think about near death from the stand point of Consciousness. It is the sukshma śarira (subtle body) that goes in different bodies and this same body experiences the near death situation of the gross body (sthula śarira).

What is the stand of Advaita upon spiritual experiences?

The word 'spiritual experience' can have different meanings for different people. For devotees the experience of meeting with their deity is a spiritual experience. For people who are in search for some miracle, seeing the future in dream or reading anybody's thoughts can be a spiritual experience. However, for Advaita (and in my opinion also) only spiritual experience is the experience of pure Consciousness without duality, where there is neither 'I' nor 'you'. Such kind of experience is important to have the clear understanding of Advaita. All other experiences are mithyā.

Can a teacher who has not yet become successful in completing Sādhanā be useful for students?

Yes, if such a person is skillful in teaching, he can at least show disciples the right direction towards Brahman. Whether a teacher is a jīvanmukta or not, becoming a jīvanmukta himself depends on the sincerity of the disciple. We have seen in the past that, various spiritual teachers or Gurus were all time best, however, they could not make all people enlightened. Similarly, there are examples when Guru was not so competent but student reached the ultimate peak. Therefore, as long as we think ourselves as disciples, we should not try to judge between competent or false Guru, we should be sincere in our effort of becoming jīvanmukta.

I do not understand how can enlightened people say that there is no doer, when I have to do work to earn money?

This is the danger when someone who has not yet matured enough to understand Advaita, reads or hears about the conclusions drawn by 'Masters' who have completed their long journey from seeming doer to non-doer. You are again confusing two different stand points; the 'I' which you refer is the body-mind that works. Mind (buddhi – intelligence) takes the decisions and body follows it. 'You' are not it, then how can you say that you are the doer. We all (in fact 'I') are the pure witness that travels through three states of mind, waking-dreaming-deep sleep. We are never affected by the happening of something in one state when we are in another state. Due to ignorance we keep identifying ourselves with the 'doers' in the three different states. However, as long as there is notion of doership we should continue doing our natural work according to karma yoga. When we understand our nature free of doership then we do not need to practice any particular method to become free from the burden of doership, then work happens smoothly without causing any trouble to us.

What is the exact meaning of chidābhāsa?

This word can be confusing and can lead to wrong conclusions. When someone explains us this word using the analogy of mirror and the reflection in the mirror as chidābhāsa, we tend to think that we are the reflection of Brahman in mind. This is not true; the word chidābhāsa is used from third person perspective and not from first person perspective. When we look at someone else, we think him as a person because of the Consciousness operating through body-mind. The consciousness that is filtered through body-mind is called as chidābhāsa, it is the illusion of Consciousness, happening to the third person, according to the nature of that body-mind. While pure Consciousness does not possess any attributes of any body-mind, the Consciousness with attributes is called as Chidābhāsa. This chidābhāsa gets enlightened in his mind about its attributeless nature.

If God is compassionate then how he has thrown us into suffering, remaining aloof without suffering himself.

No one has thrown us here in this world, we have come here with our own will (in the words of Advaita, we are here from beginningless past). God, only arranges the fruits of our actions for us, sometimes it looks painful, however, if we can try to attain self-knowledge then we can go out of this painful existence, there is no other way.

How can I get rid of the sense of 'I'?

We can get rid of ego, not of 'I'. 'I' is the intrinsic nature of existence. Since, we cannot negate our own existence; we cannot get rid of 'I'. Getting rid of the sense of 'I' is like sitting on one's own shoulders, which is impossible. However, when this 'I' gets mixed with body-mind, ego arises. To get rid of ego, surrender to Īśvara is the only remedy.

What role does the mind play in process of enlightenment?

This depends upon the intention behind the word 'mind'. Mind as thoughts or emotions do not play any role. Mind as intelligence plays a role by understanding the nature of the Pure Consciousness as its own substratum; to put it more precisely the reflected Consciousness understands its real nature through intelligence. As reflected light of sun (if alive) may understand its nature as, though reflecting from objects, it is still the original light of sun.

How can we reconcile career and spirituality?

In ancient society of India, there was a custom of four āśrama, brahmacharya, gruhastha, vānaprastha and sanyasa. Spirituality was put for last two parts, vānaprastha and sannyas, which would normally begin at the age of fifty and will last until death. The people above the age of fifty were feed by society until their last breath. Therefore, they did not had to worry about their food and shelter and could do study extensively, with study in the Vānaprastha, they were used to teach the young children (brahmachāri-s) about social orders, different arts etc. In last leg that is Sanyasa, they were depending upon society completely without giving anything in return to society.

Nowadays, we do not have such social order; hence, we have to adjust time from our youth to study the spirituality. We cannot put it aside to study in last days of our life because today life has become such difficult that there is no guarantee to reach our old age. Further, no one is going to take care of us in our old age except few lucky people who have good and caring children. Further, our upbringing and lifestyle is such that we cannot be detached from our mundane habits and clinging even in old age. So, my suggestion would be we should try and adjust time for spiritual seeking throughout our life. To do it effectively we have to reduce our needs to an extent that we can fulfill them easily by doing around eight hours of work per day. In my opinion we should give six hours for sleep in night and another six hours for our other daily activities. Remaining four hours can be utilized for spiritual inquiry. In these four hours half an hour of meditation can be helpful to calm our mind. One more important factor is remembering the name of God in every good and bad situation, like after becoming successful or unsuccessful, while enjoying pleasures or experiencing pain, before taking food, before going to sleep etc. In this way we can reconcile spirituality with career.

When I become enlightened, I become one with God, then, can I become all knowing and win a lottery?

This is misunderstanding of the concept of enlightenment. When one becomes enlightened, he becomes one with 'will' of God and not with God. No matter we are enlightened or ignorant; we are all limited persons having limited mind-body. To become all knowing we will have to possess a mind that encompasses all, which is not possible. Therefore, we should give up these childish ideas of becoming all-knowing and all powerful like God and accept our apparent presence as limited individual. From the stand point of Absolute reality there is no difference between Īśvara, and us, however, then there is no world to know or to control.

The difference between waking-dreaming and deep sleep.

Waking and dreaming is said to have two aspects, they are ignorance and error. Ignorance is of the nature of ourselves. Error is the wrong perception of things according to our own samskāra. While deep sleep has only one aspect that is ignorance of our real nature. In this ignorance (Kārana Śarira – Causal body) all vāsana-s (desires) are stored. They manifest only when we are awake or in dream.

Can we come to life again with self-knowledge?

To understand it clearly we should first look what do the term 'coming to life' mean. It means becoming attached or getting identified with sūkshma śarira, which keeps on going from one body to other body for eternity. After attaining the self-knowledge this identification is over, then it is going to be difficult to come back to life again, however, we can still manifest as individual and knowledgeable person if we want, because in reality we do not come to life, we are life.

Is enlightenment a personal experience?

In a way it is and in a way it is not. It is personal because it happens when a person understands himself as impersonal. It is impersonal because it happens with impersonal which had imagined itself as a person.

Does Advaita lead to a passive life?

Advaita leads to surrender not passivity. To surrender something we have to have it in the first place. Passivity is lack of having anything to surrender. So, only active person can follow Advaita and not a lazy one.

Can I become enlightened through meditation?

Yes and No both. Yes because it is possible to understand the real nature in deep meditation and No because meditation itself is a practice and according to Advaita no practice but only knowledge can lead us towards enlightenment. When we understand about our real nature then meditation happens effortlessly. Therefore, right knowledge and right thinking is the key to become peaceful and serene. So, when meditation happens as a spontaneous happening then it can help us to understand the non-dual nature but when meditation is done as a practice then it is useless from spiritual stand point, it may be useful in our day-to-day life because meditation can help mind to become calm.

Does the enlightened person live in our normal world or he has his own illusory world?

Enlightened person lives in unreality, to understand the world as unreal is enlightenment. However, it does not mean such a person have hallucinations about world, he also experiences the same things and people that we experience, only difference is, his attitude towards the people and world which is different than us.

Do spiritual teachers start teaching out of spiritual ego?

There is no ego even in the pupil, one who understands that there is no ego can become the spiritual teacher. Ego is just a feeling of separateness, it is not something substantive. A true spiritual teacher is a person who has got this understanding clearly, without any doubt. Then such a person can start teaching to others the same thing. In fact, it is not teaching in any way, it is just pointing towards the error of perception that all people in this world seem to have.

Can't we say that Consciousness is also a game of mind as the world?

The Consciousness is something that experiences the mind; it is not under the spell of mind and world is also not our mind game, world has its own reality, we can't agree with the idealistic world view. However it is true that we normally project our own ideas on the real world outside, in this sense world is a mind game. As far as Consciousness is concern it is certainly not construction of mind.

To have a clear understanding a detail study of mind and Consciousness is necessary, this kind of understanding happens in mind but to Consciousness, not to mind. Mind is an inert entity and Consciousness is intelligence.

How are you saying māyā as both real and unreal?

Maya is real when we are under its influence, when we are free from it then it is unreal like a dream. We do not need to have any spiritual experience to see this, we can just look at our own past and we can see that now in this moment the whole past is nothing but just a dream. Similarly this moment is also going to be past and get converted into a dream or just a sweet or unhappy memory in the 'now' of the future.

How can we ignite a desire for self?

It happens by itself. When we do not have any other desire, then automatically we realize the Self, there is no need to have a desire for it. On the other hand, it is also true that desire for self is necessary on a particular level of development. To have the desire for liberation or self-knowledge, we should try to see the transient nature of apparent world. However, ultimately we have to give up that desire also because Self is not something other than us which we could achieve by some efforts, it is our nature.

If I am God then I am the creator of the world, but why can't I live life as I want?

This question shows misunderstanding about Transactional and Absolute levels. Advaita talks from two different viewpoints and you are mixing them with each other. Advaita does not say you are God, it says you are Consciousness or Brahman on Absolute level. However, on this Transactional level we are all separate individuals with limited powers and limited knowledge, Īśvara is omnipresent and omniscient, not jīva. Therefore, our lives are decided by the past karma that we have done and our future is decided by our current actions not only on current wills. It is also true that we may have a strong will power but that is also the result of our past good karma.

Is it true that Consciousness is not the final reality?

These words Consciousness, Awareness, Brahman etc. are mere words, which are attempts to bring something beyond the reach of language into the reach of language for the sake of understanding of ignorant. Different words are useful according to different levels of understanding of seekers. Ultimately Brahman (if we may call it for the sake of convenience) is beyond words, definitions and language. Therefore, there is no need to think Consciousness as ultimate reality. Reality is all-inclusive, however we cannot say that it is unreal or absent, therefore, being (Satyam), it is not unconscious, therefore, Consciousness (Dnyānam), and it is not finite, therefore, infinite (Anantam). All these words are used for Brahman relative to the experiences of our apparent world. If we want to describe Brahman directly then silence is the only authentic description.

I think I have understood Advaita intellectually, how can I go ahead?

Understanding intellectually is the part of Śravana aspect of traditional method. Then next step is doing more deep study and removing doubts about the Self, which is called as Manana. The last thing is Nididhyāsana, means implementing the knowledge acquired through understanding of Advaita, into our day-to-day life.

Can you explain me with complete surety that Consciousness is independent of matter and has no seat in Brain?

You are asking for Pramāna or proof. I have discussed about the logic in detail in this book. However, in tradition of Advaita the Self or Consciousness and its nature are known only through Śruti or scriptures, why? Because, scriptures tell us something, which cannot be known by any other means of knowledge and at the same time it cannot be refuted by any other means of knowledge. Therefore, according to traditional Advaita the means of knowledge of Consciousness is only Śruti (Upanishad).

And why do you worry about being seated in brain or not, if you are not seated in brain then you will not die with it because then you are immortal so there is no problem and if you are seated in brain then you will die with it, then also you will not have any problem as you can see that you had no problem before you were born. So in either case you are not going to have any problem then why worry.

What is the role of Kundalini Śakti in Advaita?

Kundalini power has virtually no role in Advaita system. Though I have read somewhere that ādi Śankarāchārya has given importance to kundalini in one of his book. However, looking at all other books written by him, it seems unlikely. Looking at the fan following of ādi Śankarāchārya, some other philosophers have tried to impose their views on him by writing books in his name. Therefore, there is doubt about many books named after ādi Śankarāchārya; whether those books are his works has not been proved undoubtedly. However there are few books about which there are no doubts that they are the work of ādi Śankarāchārya, for example Brahmasūtra Bhaśya, Gītā Bhaśya and few more. In these books, ādi Śankarāchārya has not mentioned kundalini as essential for realization of Self.

I have not done much study or practice in this respect, however I can tell surely based on my own experience of Self, and words of My Guruji that self-knowledge takes place in mind and then its effects are experienced in life. Kundalini power does not belong to Consciousness; it belongs to māyā, which is ultimately mithyā. People who are interested in some supernatural powers are interested in Kundalini; however, Advaita talks about self-knowledge and not about super-natural powers.

Is Sanskrit necessary to understand non-duality?

Sanskrit is necessary if one wants to study the original scriptures of Advaita (non-duality). However, it is not necessary to realize our true nature, there are many commentaries upon original Sanskrit scriptures, written in various languages by competent people and we can accomplish the work by reading those commentaries and coming into contact with an authentic teacher who speaks our language.

Do 'I' am also perceived by God?

It depends upon what you mean by the word 'I'. I (as body-mind) am definitely perceived by 'I' (as Consciousness). However we cannot go beyond this step, if we say that there is another 'I' or God who perceives the 'I' who perceives body-mind then we will fall into regressus ad infinitum, because we will need another 'I' to perceive that 'I'. Light itself does not need another light in order to see it. Similarly the real 'I' (Consciousness) does not deed another Consciousness to know it. 'I' is self luminous and one for all of us, it is the body-mind which are different in all of us.

Is there anything like partial enlightenment and complete enlightenment?

Yes there is, when one listens the mahāvākya from Guru, he becomes partially enlightened. When all doubts (at least most doubts) about mahāvākya are removed then one becomes completely enlightened. However, there is difference between Dnyāna (enlightenment) and Dnyāna phalam (fruits of enlightenment). When the practice of Sādhana Chatushtaya is complete along with enlightenment, one attains the Dnyāna phalam as undisturbed undercurrent of peace.

How can scriptures describe Brahman as satyam-dnyānam-anantam, and say it as indescribable?

Satyam-Dnyānam-Anantam (Real, Consciousness, and Infiniteness) is not the description of Brahman, it is just an indication given towards the being, which is opposite to unreality, unconsciousness and finiteness of this world. Brahman itself is indescribable, still we have to call it by some name (as Brahman, Being, Consciousness etc.). In fact, we cannot give any name to something, which is beyond the name and form, however we have to do this on this transactional plane to communicate with each other, since this world is itself of the names and forms, we cannot do otherwise.

What is the role of 'witness' in Advaita?

As I understand, witness is the middle point of Consciousness and person. When we start witnessing our own mind remaining aloof from it then we come close to our real nature. However, witness also belongs to the world of duality, witness and witnessed. As long as there is knower of world (body-mind), there is witness. Once we transcend these three knower (body-mind)-known (objects)-knowledge, and then in that absolute non-dual state there is no witness either. Witness is the state of consciousness, which experiences the knower (body-mind) remaining aloof from it.

Do all people have subjective experiences or only I am having subjective experience?

This question does not belong to Advaita, rather it belongs to idealism. According to Advaita philosophy (and my own opinion also), we all are having subjective experiences. On transactional level there exist a world out there which operates according to the will of God, and I am also a part of it. The world is not my (our) projection, it has its own existence. We should not mix solipsism with non-dualism.

How Advaita takes one to enlightenment?

In fact, Advaita starts with enlightenment. In Nāth tradition when a person reaches a Master with enquiry about truth and if Master finds that the urge is genuine, then He initiates the person in Nāth Sampradaya by telling him about his real nature, if the disciple is completely ready to grasp the truth then he becomes enlightened immediately. If he is not ready then he has to follow the Sādhana Chatushtaya and contemplate on the discourse of Master. He has to discuss with Master (Guru) about the doubts that he may have in mind. After all doubts are removed gradually then such disciple is said to be enlightened fully. After the process of enlightenment is complete, disciple's life becomes full of peace and happiness. In this way Advaita takes disciples to peace through enlightenment of the knowledge of Self, not to enlightenment through anything else.

Is it true that knowledge is eternal?

Words are tricky and they have to be used in right context. In Sanskrit there is a word 'dnyāna' and it is translated in English as 'knowledge'. However dnyāna has two meanings one is 'information' and second is 'Awareness'

Information is unlimited and we can never come to the end of information. But, the second meaning that is 'Awareness', is not something that is stored in memory as information. When we experience something (for example a flower) then we become aware of that thing. However, when we experience something else (for example a flowerpot below that flower) then our awareness of previous thing (flower) goes and the mind is occupied by other thing (flowerpot). At the same time an image of previously seen thing is recorded in memory (as information of flower). This kind of perceptual awareness is also called as knowledge.

There is another kind of awareness which is the awareness of 'I'. This 'I' is also called as Dnyāna in Vedānta. Therefore, while using words, first we have to take the context into consideration. Knowledge as information is not eternal.

Is there any difference between liberation and enlightenment?

It depends upon one's viewpoint; we can say that to realize our inherent freedom is enlightenment. However, to implement the understanding gain through enlightenment in day-to-day life can take ample time if our mind is not fully prepared for enlightenment. This preparation is called as Sādhana Chatushtaya Sampatti in tradition. After completely achieving this preparation, enlightenment and liberation both are one.

Are some people more compassionate towards the suffering of this world?

Yes, it might be possible depending upon the upbringing and inherent nature of a person. A person may be of a very kind heart and such a person cannot become easily detached from the suffering of this world. Nevertheless, when such a person goes to sleep then he automatically becomes detached otherwise how anyone can go to sleep happily when such a suffering is there in this world. It is just a matter of time that the detachment of sleep enters in waking state also. However, remaining detached does not mean remaining aloof; we should try to help everyone that comes into our contact to become free from suffering.

How can we reconcile the presence of māyā in Brahman?

We cannot do it, because māyā is non-existent. We cannot reconcile truth with false (in polite word absolute truth with something illusory). Māyā is not something tangible; it is an assumption to explain the presence of multiplicity of world in non-dual homogenous Brahman. Māyā is not directly perceptible; hence, we have to infer its presence and presence of Īśvara, who rules it, to reconcile the apparent world with Brahman. Otherwise Māyā means illusion of multiplicity, it is a concept, and it is not something which has existence.

We can never meet Īśvara because He is present only when māyā is present, when we transcend māyā then there is no separate Īśvara other than Brahman, in other words, we can also say that the term Brahman is used to denote the absolute state of Īśvara, who appears as operating this world to all of us, the embodied beings. As long as we are embodied, we have to worship Īśvara because He has arranged all luxuries of life (food, water, air, clothing etc.) for us and we should be obliged to Him. However, when we become Videha mukta, then of course no worship of Īśvara is possible because we become one with Him.

As I have mentioned before that māyā and Īśvara are inferences that are used to reconcile the presence of apparent world with Brahman. Here an important question arises that why should we reconcile the apparent world with imaginary Brahman. Why should we think that there is something like Brahman, which is infinite and pure Consciousness? Why not we just assume that there is apparent world and we should live in it happily, why think about māyā and Brahman. We can answer above question in two ways. First, for the people who have faith in śāstra (scriptures) the only proof of Brahman is the śāstra itself. Scriptures are written by enlightened people, who had experienced Brahman, therefore, we should also assume (until we experience it) that there is something like Brahman following the āpta vākya (the words of scriptures or reliable persons), who wrote the scriptures because they are the only proof for presence of Brahman.

Second way of answering the question about presence of Brahman is through logic, we have to assume that there must be something like Brahman, which is the substratum of all. Here I am mentioning the thought process, which can be helpful to assume the presence of absolute non-dual Brahman. We can clearly see that everything is momentary; everything keeps on changing each moment. The high pace of change causes the illusion of continuity between two moments and we can experience the world as it appears. Second important thing is the experiencer of this change, the experiencer of two moments has to be there without changing with the first moment, if he changes then who will realize that the first moment has gone and second moment has come. Therefore, we have come to know that there are two entities, first is, the continuously passing existence and second is the existence of experiencer of this continuous change, which does not change with moment. If there is no experiencer then there can be no cognition of this apparent world. Since the cognition is happening, we have to assume the presence of the experiencer.

With the help of the 'presence of cognition' we come to another conclusion also that the 'experienced' is not conscious, it is inert, because experiencer is Conscious and Consciousness cannot experience itself as other than itself, if we can experience the world other than ourselves (because we are the Consciousness), then the world has to be inert.

Therefore, now there are two entities, one is inert and other is Consciousness. Here a question arises, these two, Consciousness, and matter exist independently, or one depends upon other for its existence? In these two, only Consciousness can confirm its existence on its own, inert matter cannot confirm its existence on its own, there has to be Consciousness to know and confirm the existence of inert matter. If Consciousness does not confirm the existence of matter then its existence is anirvachanīya means we cannot say surely that matter exists or not, it may exist or it may not.

When we take same logic, further we can see that matter or world is momentary as we saw before. Momentary existence is not an existence because it changes continuously. Then, where this change is taking place? The change has to occur on some unchanging background, for example as we see changing images of TV have to have an unchanging background of screen, changing waves of ocean have to have big reservoir of water as their background and support. Hence we have to conclude that there is something unchanging (Sat) to support the continuously changing world. As we saw before that Consciousness exist without changing with passing moment and there is an unchanging support to the changing appearances that we see. Hence, we can come to following equation.

Substratum of momentary world (sat ) = unchanging,

Consciousness (dnyāna ) = unchanging,

Therefore, sat (Being) = dnyāna (Consciousness)

Since the Consciousness is the absolute existence, which is the substratum of momentary world then it has to be infinite (Anantam). Why? Because finite things are momentary, they are bound by time. As we saw before that Consciousness does not change with moment or in other words Consciousness is beyond the limits of time. When something is beyond the limits of time then it has to be beyond the limits of space also, because time and space are not two different things, they are the same thing. Rather we can say that time has no separate existence other than space because when we say 'time' we mean change that occurs in space.

After such a long thinking, we have come to conclusion that there exist Brahman (Brahman = satyam dnyānam anantam) and we have to reconcile the presence of world with that Brahman. To accomplish this job our ancestors have used the hypothetical power called māyā, which projects this phenomenal world into the Brahman. However, the presence of world does not bring any change in Brahman so the world is only appearance like in the gold ring there is the appearance of ring in the gold.

What is the role of faith?

Faith in Īśvara and Guru (though they both are one) is necessary in the beginning of enquiry. If we do not trust our Guru then how can we follow his instructions and reach a profound state of peaceful existence? Therefore, until we realize without any doubt in mind, we need to put faith in Guru. How to recognize a trustworthy Guru is another matter but when we accept someone as our Guru then we must have faith in him.

How should enlightened person behave in today's world?

An enlightened person lives for all beings and not only for himself; therefore, such a person adopts adequate lifestyle which can be useful for other people also. We should not try to judge anybody only out of his/her lifestyle because it depends upon many factors that we may not know.

Is this world real?

This world is real for us who are getting identified with the body and mind, which are products of this world. We have not created our own body and mind; we got them in this world from body-mind of our parents, who are a part of this world. This world is called as Relative or Transactional Reality. This world is helpful for Consciousness (us) to transact with each other. When we become satisfied (at least partly) through these transactions then slowly we stop getting identified with our body-mind. If our nature is curious then we start studying philosophy like Advaita. If our nature is humble then we start praying to God for welfare of all beings. Through such activities we realize ourselves as devoid of body-mind and then world loses its reality. Then it becomes mithyā (for philosopher) or dependent upon God's will (for devotee).

If we all are one, then, why I cannot feel your sensations?

This question suggests an error in understanding. You are mixing two different perspectives; we all are one through Absolute viewpoint, not on this transactional plane. Sensations are felt on the level of body and mind, (on Transactional plane) if one wants to feel someone else's sensations then he has to get special training in yoga. I personally do not know anything about the practices of yoga that help you to feel the sensations or to know the thoughts of other people.

Can mind help us to achieve enlightenment?

To understand mind as illusory can help, not mind. Dream can help understand reality when it is no more, similarly mind also can help when it is no more. This understanding happens in mind but to Consciousness, not to mind. It is like when I put a ring in my finger then though the ring is put in the finger, still it belongs to me and not to finger.

Does this World has independent existence ?

No, world exists only for the perceiver, if there is no perceiver then there is no world, they both are māyā, perceiver and perceived both rise and fall simultaneously. Without perceiver, there is existence of existence itself, not of the world.

Why suffering is there?

If we keep on clinging to our body-mind then suffering is necessary to make us free from body-mind. We have to understand the mechanism of suffering, it is there because we cling to things and emotions, which are not permanent, and they are transient by nature. Therefore, when we expect unending happiness from transitory things then we have to suffer. Only way out of suffering is to accept the truth as it is.

How did God come into being?

God/Brahman exists always, it has not "come into being" at any time in past, if we assume Brahman as something limited by time then ultimately we will reach to nihilism because time will destroy being (sat aspect of Brahman) one day and there will be nothing. This scenario is not possible because time itself has to have some support in being to exist, time cannot exist in non-being. Therefore we have to conclude that being is always present beyond the limits of time.

Is Self completely aloof from word?

It depends upon our perspective, from the viewpoint of Absolute nothing matters. From viewpoint of transactional reality there are matters that matter.

According to Advaita "I am God," then why am I not all powerful?

"I" cannot be all powerful because it has already cut from its source. Only "No-I" can be real powerful. In the words of Bhakti only the real devotee can be powerful because he gets the unlimited power of Supreme Lord as his support.

One more thing has to be understood that Advaita does not say that you are God/Īśvara. It says "you are Brahman". There is difference between Brahman and Īśvara. Īśvara has the adjunct (upādhi) of Universe, therefore He is all powerful. However, Brahman does not have any adjunct rather it is the silent and infinite presence which is the support of both Jīva and Īśvara. When we look from the stand point of Brahman then there is no Universe and no powers to operate it, when we look from the stand point of Jīva then we are limited individuals with limited power and knowledge. We can never become Īśvara because Īśvara is not a particular individual but collectively entire Universe. We can be Brahman or we can be Jīva, we cannot be entire manifested Universe.

Does mind act itself?

Mind does not do anything; it is our interest in it that keeps it going. When we lose interest in the activities of mind, in other words when we lose interest in selfish and fruitful activities then mind stops automatically.

Who becomes enlightened?

The existence or sat becomes aware about its real nature through its own Awareness. To make it simple to understand, Vedanta puts a concept of Chidābhāsa, this Chidābhāsa becomes enlightened.

Should we try forcibly to stop the mind?

We should not force mind to stop. Rather we should try to follow the method of discrimination between real and unreal. Then after understanding the unreal as transient mind automatically stops running before it and becomes calm.

How can we reconcile the active world with inactive Self?

Action and inaction both belong to the Self, it is not that Self is insentient like a rock. Self is Consciousness and bliss. Therefore, when we see active Universe then we should understand that it is a quarter of absolute Self (Brahman), which is experienced in waking state. In waking state, the Self is active. However, when it comes out of waking state, no stain from waking is left on it, and while in waking also, we should understand the process of anvaya-vyatireka. To understand these terms, an analogy of necklace is used. The beads of necklace are strung on a string, without the string there cannot be any necklace. Similarly without the Self or Brahman there can be no waking state or no Universe, it is called as anvaya. However, at the same time, the string is separate from beads, similarly the Brahman is separate from the Universe, and it is called as vyatireka. Another analogy of clay and pot can also be used. Prior to the creation of pot the clay exists, while pot is there the clay still exists and when the pot is broken then also clay exists, therefore we regard clay as real and pot as mithya (depending upon clay for its existence). Similarly, when world exist we exist and when world does not exist (as in deep sleep) we still continue to exist. Therefore, we must conclude that we the Consciousness, are real and the world of names and forms is mithya.

What is the view of Advaita towards environment?

From the absolute viewpoint of Advaita, environment is also transient therefore, it keeps on becoming good and bad. There may be various reasons including mans selfish actions for destruction of environment.

However, from relative stand point we should try to protect it. The thought to protect environment can be said as a reason of environment getting good from its current bad condition.

How and why did we become ignorant?

It is the same question that has been answered before, why do we need spiritual evolution. Here again, from the absolute stand point there is no ignorance, everything is Brahman. However, on the Transactional plane we behave as if we are ignorant. If we take the question further and ask why we behave as ignorant? Then this question is ultimately unanswerable. Because to know the cause of Transactional plane and ignorance on it we have to go beyond it, and there is no ignorance beyond ignorance. It is like trying to see the darkness with light.

When we ask how did we become ignorant, we assume that we have become ignorant at some time in past, however, time itself is a product of ignorance, then how can we say that ignorance has started in past. At the most we can say that ignorance is happening now, we cannot say it started in past. Therefore, Advaita says that ignorance is beginningless, anādi. We cannot imagine any beginning of ignorance because as said before any new beginning is a product of ignorance since it shows the effect of time.

Is meaning of karma yoga 'the unselfish work'?

Karma yoga does not mean unselfish work in the sense of social service. It is the work done without asking for anything in return, not even well-being of others. Karma yoga is the alert response given to every new situation according to that situation without worrying about outcome. However, we have to understand that Alertness (sattvaguna) is the prerequisite of karma yoga. Alertness means no anxiety, no anger, no lust, just pure wakefulness. This kind of alertness is only possible if we are not concerned with the outcome of our work, and if we are surrendered to Īśvara.

Can I choose to become enlightened at any moment or not?

It is not a question of our choice. As a little child grows to adulthood automatically, whether if that child wants it or not, similarly one day we become enlightened whether we want it or not. 'Choosing' something belongs to ego (mind), and when we get frustrated again and again by choosing wrong, then we stop running before mind, then the door to enlightenment opens.

As now we are caught in ignorance, is it possible to get caught into it again after enlightenment?

After enlightenment the question of getting caught into ignorance has no importance, as when one wakes up from dream then there is no importance of dream is left, then the question of getting caught into dream again also loses its significance, because after all dream is not real, then why worry and become afraid about something unreal. Even if one goes to sleep and experiences dream again then still it is ok, because the time we experience in dream has no significance from waking stand point, similarly the time we experience in waking has no significance, even of a second, from the stand point of eternity. Once someone understands the nature of Brahman (and his own), as eternal then question of 'again' has no meaning because nothing has happened in the first place, then how can something happen again?

In your question, you say, 'as now', however we are not caught in now; we are caught between past and future. In 'Now', there is only freedom-awareness-silence (satyam-dnyanam-anantam).

Back to Top

If everyone becomes enlightened then will this world come to an end forever?

Since, souls are infinite in number, everyone cannot become enlightened. As sky is infinite in all directions, similarly souls are infinite in number. So, as you say, "If everyone becomes enlightened," it is not possible. This world is in a cycle of creation, maintenance and destruction and this cycle is going to be repeated forever. Only, individual souls will realize that they are Brahman and they will step out of this cycle (or not, depends upon their choice). Here question may arise, how can there be infinite souls? Answer to this question is, it is beyond the capacity of our imagination, like we cannot imagine infinite sky. If we try to imagine pure sky, then we can only imagine a dome however, sky is not a dome.

Why do you write or talk about Advaita? Is it not egoistic, you should hide your knowledge and remain silent.

Talking with likeminded people about Advaita is not egoistic. In fact, it is helpful in removing my own misunderstanding and ego. You can think it as my own Sādhana. It is called as satsanga, the company of truth. It is not that I am teaching others through my talks and books, rather I am sharing my understanding with others, if I have misunderstood then through talks with other people I can correct it. I am thankful to people for allowing me to talk with them and reading my books. As far as hiding knowledge is concern, who will hide? There has to be ego also to hide the knowledge, for me hiding and showing both belong to ego, non-ego is not doing anything intentionally, if showing happens, happens and if hiding happens, happens, I have no role in it.

What is the difference between consciousness (chetana) and Awareness (chaitanya)?

These words are used in different ways by different Masters. As far as I am concerned (only to explain this question, otherwise in this book these words might be used interchangeably, one should take the meaning according to the context), I can say that consciousness (chetana) is the life force or jīvā and Consciousness (capital 'C') is the jīvātmā, the experiencer of consciousness and Awareness is pure Consciousness, which is Brahman itself. We can say that Consciousness arises in Awareness as experiencer of apparent world and again merges back into it at the time of Videha Mukti.

Why there is māyā in Brahman if Brahman has no will?

The answer to this question is very difficult to understand from the standpoint of transactional level. We (as person) only act through will or need, therefore, we use same rule with Brahman. We cannot understand that māyā is not act of Brahman, rather it is the (in the words of Gaudapāda) svabhāva, the nature of Brahman and of the nature of Brahman. It is not created by any efforts from the side of Brahman; it appears in it as a dream appears in mind. Dream has no substance other than mind. We can also say that it is nature of Brahman to appear as many when it is in waking and dreaming state. Even when one knows Brahman, māyā still continues to exist apparently, as in desert, even after realizing the mirage as false, we can still see it. Māyā itself is not a problem; our ignorance of its transient nature is problem.

Why should I work to earn money if there is no doer?

Concepts of Advaita are not so easy to understand. We usually think that we have understood them and then such questions arise. This kind of thinking is the mixing of two different stand points. It is true from the absolute stand point that there is no doer and nothing to do. However, from the Transactional standpoint we are all doers and there are so many things to do (at least as long as you think "why should 'I' work?") The not doing of anything is also going to be a doing of not-doing done by apparent doer. There is a concept in Advaita about attaining a level when everything is done without the feeling of doership. At that time, when we are fully able to reconcile the absolute truth with transactional level, we can say that there is no doer. Until that time comes we should keep doing our work according to our nature without clinging to its results.

Does Brahman provide support to evil?

There is no evil in Brahman because Brahman is absolutely alone or Advaita, there is not any personality in Brahman. We usually think there is evil somewhere along with Īśvara and he causes all miseries in this world. However, in Advaita there is no concept of evil, rather there is God of destruction. Advaita says that destruction also happens by the will of God and not by any evil. Though there is trinity in Advaita but the trinity does not suggest three different deities, it is three concepts imagined in one and only Īśvara according to His functions.

What is the meaning of oneness with Īśvara?

It means we are not separate from Him. We may appear as different people but we are not separate from each other and Īśvara of course. However, Advaita does not say that we are one with Īśvara; it says we are Brahman, which is the substratum of us and Īśvara both. We are not Īśvara or one with Īśvara because adjunct of Īśvara and adjunct of jīva is different. On the level of adjuncts we (Īśvara and jīva) are different but on the substantial level we are one with Him.

Is it possible to convey reality in language?

There are always some problems in sharing our feelings with others because mostly people understand different than what we are saying. But there is no other way; we have to use the language to convey our feelings to others. Especially when it comes to sharing something which is not directly accessible to senses then it becomes even harder. Therefore, Masters of Advaita have used the language in negative way. They have not defined Brahman in positive terms as 'this is Brahman' or 'that is Brahman'. Rather they have defined Brahman as 'neti neti' (not this, not this).In this way we can avoid many problems that language causes in expressing the reality.

When any animal is cloned then what might happen with its soul?

There is no need to think about any imaginary scenario. However, in reality only body can be cloned and not the soul, another soul may start operating the cloned living body. This question shows misunderstanding about the Consciousness and body.

Do the realized souls reincarnate?

Yes, realized souls can also reincarnate for others, not for themselves. A realized soul is not different from Brahman, in fact to understand the oneness with whole (Brahman) is realization. A realized jīva does not have anything personal, he lives for all, dies for all and if necessary reincarnates for all. Enlightenment does not end the individuality of a person rather makes him one with the will of Supreme Lord, reincarnation of an enlightened being happens according to the will of Supreme and not his personal will. Incarnation in itself is not wrong, problem arises when we incarnate or reincarnate as ignorant Jīva, ignorance is problem not incarnation. If we can incarnate as realized person then we can happily take part in the līlā of Īśvara.

I can understand your problem, you might think that if we 'have' to reincarnate even after enlightenment or liberation then why worry about this whole business of enlightenment? However as I mentioned before life or incarnation is not bad, as Gaudapāda mentions in his Kārikā, it is the svabhāva of Brahman. If we incarnate as ignorant then we have to face suffering and if we incarnate as knowledgeable then for us this life is a līlā (play) of Supreme.

Finally, incarnation and reincarnation happens on this Transactional plane, from the standpoint of absolute there is no world and there is no incarnation either.

Why not everyone become enlightened with one person becoming enlightened?

This is the error in understanding Advaita philosophy. According to Advaita there are three types of realities. A. Illusion B. Transactional C. Absolute. We put illusion aside for time being. When we look at Absolute Reality we all are non-dual. We can use the metaphor of Gold and its ornaments. As the ornaments made up of gold, though they appear different, are nothing but gold, therefore, here we can say that gold is the absolute reality. Similarly we all jīva-s and the world we live in is nothing but Brahman or Consciousness from the stand point of absolute reality. However, as ornaments of gold have different attributes than gold, as a ring of gold is round etc., we all jīva-s have different attributes than Brahman, which has no attributes of its own.

On the transactional level we exist as different jīva-s (not separate though), the enlightenment of one jīva does not affect other jīva-s because enlightenment happens in mind of individual and different individuals have different minds. It is true that ultimately enlightenment happens with Brahman about its real nature, but that happens in mind to which Brahman seems to be attached. Therefore, when one person becomes enlightened, others are not and they continue their journey in this transactional world as long as they are ignorant.

Am I reflection or reality?

The metaphor of reflection is used for the sake of understanding. Sun or moon reflecting in various water bodies is used to indicate the Oneness in the core of all apparent jīvas (souls). There is no need to think ourselves as reflection of Brahman in mind as reflection of sun in water. The 'I' is not refection, it is the Brahman itself, however, we misunderstand ourselves as mind-body, and therefore, the life force in mind-body can be called as reflection. If someone finds the metaphor of reflection confusing, then he or she can think of the metaphor of pot space (soul), hall space (God) and space without any adjunct (Brahman). Another metaphor of waves (souls), ocean (Īśvara), and water of ocean (Brahman) can also be useful.

Why do we need śabda pramāna to know ourselves?

We do not need Śabda pramāna to 'know' ourselves; we need it because we have forgotten ourselves. In fact we know ourselves continuously as 'I'. However we do not remember that 'I' is pure Consciousness and mix it with body-mind. The scriptures give us remembrance of our real nature with the help of reasoning.

Where is the bliss in purposeless life?

(After attaining knowledge of Brahman, one comes to understanding that everything is purposeless and life is meaningless, because there is nothing to achieve and nowhere to go. In such a hollowness how can we become blissful, where is that bliss?)

It is an intermediate stage when ego continues to function even after attaining the knowledge of Brahman; because it is the need of ego to have some purpose to give meaning to life. When ego finds that ultimately life is purposeless and therefore meaningless, it starts sensing hollowness. There is no need to worry about this kind of feeling, it is just a matter of time (varies for different people) when ego is completely merged with pure presence, then what can you do? You are just as you are, then there is bliss (precise word would be 'peace') without any reason. Before such merging happens mind is going to tell that life without any purpose is boring. If we wait with patience then slowly mind stops complaining about life.

Is it possible to become enlightened through investigation?

Yes, it is true that a sincere investigation can lead us to enlightenment. However, to spread effects of enlightenment on our day-to-day life we have to do some sādhanā, that sādhanā is usually referred as Sādhana Chatushtaya. Another important feature is devotion to Īśvara, so that we can become synchronized with the Cosmic Order.

Why should we bother about good and evil if everything is Brahman?

This question shows terrible misunderstanding of Advaita. This is the confusion of Vyavahāra (Transactional Reality) and Paramārtha (Absolute Reality).

From the stand point of Transactional plane everything is different, as water and fire are different, light and darkness are different, different people are different etc. All these differences are ruled by almighty Īśvara/God, and there is rule of karma which yields the fruits of our actions. Therefore, we have to consider doing only good actions if we want peace and happiness for ourselves and for others.

From the stand point of Absolute Reality there is only Brahman and not 'everything'. There are no-things or events in Brahman which are different from each other, therefore, the question of good and bad does not arise there. However, when we come to this transactional plane we have to follow the rules of karma.

Back to Top

Why should I follow Sādhanā if I am absolute?

It is important to know that one is absolute and pure Consciousness in reality but what is the use of this truth if we cannot implement it in life while living on this earth. Though, it is true that when someone becomes a jīvanmukta, he or she does not need to follow any rule in life. However, until we reach that stage it is better to practice the Sādhana Chatushtaya. We should never assume that we are already pure Consciousness; therefore, we are already a Dnyānī. Though we are Consciousness we can be a adnyāni (ignorant) and until we come out of ignorance we should do Sādhanā.

Do the enlightened people have to suffer from pain?

Enlightened person experiences the pain, because pains and pleasures are there as long as body is alive, they are attributes of body-mind. However, the enlightened person does not suffer from pain, because suffering is the state of ignorant mind, it is there when we have feeling of being body-mind. Enlightened person is the person who has fully realized himself as Consciousness and not the body-mind.

Does the truth change with our different standpoints?

Truth is absolute and it does not change. Truth includes all standpoints. However, when we look from any particular standpoint, we cannot realize entire truth. There is a famous story of seven blind people trying to know the elephant by touching it, none of them can really know how the whole elephant is, all of them guess about elephant according to their own touch of elephant's body. Similarly, when we look at truth from the standpoint of individual person and when we look at it as no-person then we realize truth differently. When we look at truth from the stand point of waking state alone and when we look at truth including dream and sleep experiences also, then the understanding is going to be very much different. Most of the religions and philosophies including modern science look at the truth only from the standpoint of waking state, only Advaita looks from the standpoint of Turiya who encompasses all three states. Therefore, there is huge difference in Advaita and other philosophies. Only Advaita regards world as mithyā, all others regard world as real. However, Advaita accepts the reality of world from the relative standpoint.

After enlightenment, how does one look at people and different events in their life? Do they matter or not?

After enlightenment one understands that everything has locus in Brahman, there is no separate thing or person. However, this understanding does not make one careless about other people, because though they are mithyā, still they are not non-existent. They exist and an enlightened person has a feeling of love and care for all the existing living beings. Until all beings (just to say 'all', otherwise they are innumerable) realize themselves as Brahman, they are going to be in life of dualities of love and hate, happiness and unhappiness. Therefore, an enlightened person tries to make more and more people realize about their real nature with love and affection.

Is enlightenment a permanent new state of happiness?

No state is permanent; states keep on coming and going. Happiness also keeps on coming and going when we understand it then we go beyond the states into peaceful awareness then it is permanent. Peace is permanent. Enlightenment is not a new state; it is the understanding of our real nature.

Is study of scriptures useful?

Yes, if it is done with sincerity.

What is the meaning of knowledge?

It depends upon our viewpoint. Normally we use the word 'knowledge' for the information we put into memory. According to Vedānta knowledge is eternal and always present, it is the ignorance that seems to cover it.

Is it possible to enlighten someone through "Śakti Pāta"?

I personally do not have any experience of such thing so I cannot tell anything about it. However, according to tradition of Advaita, enlightenment is the gradual understanding of Self as beyond space and time, so it cannot happen by any external power.

Should we try to be happy in all situations?

We should not do anything artificially including being happy. If there is happiness then we should be happy and if there is no happiness then we should enjoy the unhappiness.

Is calmness of mind important?

Yes, when mind is calm, it is more capable of understanding subtle thoughts.

Why is there so much confusion about enlightenment?

It is because different Masters use this word in many ways. In addition, people want something special to be there in enlightenment. However, in reality enlightenment in spiritual terms simply means becoming aware of our own nature which is already there.

Can we decide time of enlightenment?

It is like saying do children have choice when they will grow up or not? No, we do not have any choice, when the time is right we become enlightened about our real nature. It is not the question of whether one wants it or not, because the spell of māyā is not permanent like Consciousness. In addition, if someone wants to avoid enlightenment then what can he do? Because before enlightenment no one knows what is it and how can we avoid something that we do not know?

Shall we worry about thoughts?

There is no need to worry about thoughts that come in our mind, only necessary thing is not getting identified with any thought. After all, worrying about thoughts is also a thought so we should remain aloof from this thought also.

Is there difference between samādhi and the deep sleep state?

Difference is not of the content, but of the quality. When we go into sleep unconsciously then it is ordinary sleep and when we enter sleep with awareness then it is Samādhi. But both come and go, therefore they are transient like anything else. The experiencer of both is the only reality.

Does the knower of Brahman have Individuality?

Yes, on the transactional level, such a person has individuality because as long as the 'person' (body-mind) is alive, all of us have different personalities according to our upbringing. However, the knower of Brahman knows that his own personality is also as transitory as anything else. Therefore he does not take himself seriously.

I do not think I need enlightenment, why should I go for it?

The life on this transactional level is by nature dualistic, there is always the pair of happiness-unhappiness, win-loss, gaining-losing etc. however; it is also possible that one may see only one side of these two pairs (may be happiness in your case) for long time in life. The person who is enjoying the dream will never try to come out of it, similarly the person who is enjoying the life always try to avoid the concept of enlightenment. From the stand point of absolute reality, it is also ok. You can continue living your life happily.

When we see dreams, are the people we experience in dream real?

The dreamed people and locations are real in dream; they are not real in waking state. Similarly, the people in waking state are real in waking state; they are not real in dream. Because of this similarity between these two states some thinkers call waking state as dream and put both of them in same category.

What should I do with my anger?

As I understand we cannot do anything when we are already in it, though realizing that we are in anger sometimes helps to minimize it. To avoid getting caught in anger we have to follow karma yoga, Bhakti and meditation, all simultaneously when we are not angry. Only this is the real solution.

Is it necessary to give up all beliefs to attain Self-knowledge?

It depends upon what belief you have. If you have strong belief that enjoyments of this world can quench your thirst for happiness, then this kind of belief has to be removed. Until then one cannot leave the world back and go ahead in the pursuit of self-knowledge.

Do love, justice, faith, compassion, truth etc. are all unreal.

All these things are not unreal; they are mithyā because they all belong to transactional plane. From the standpoint of absolute reality, there is no one other than Brahman so who will love whom? Who will be compassionate and with whom?

Back to Top

### Conclusion

Here we come to the end of this book. I hope this book will definitely help readers to make progress in their spiritual journey. In this book, we have studied different philosophies. We studied science in a way, which is not available to us usually in classes or in public discussions. Ultimately, I have chosen Advaita philosophy as the best ideology, which we should follow in our life. When I say best then I mean best for me and for people who think like me. It is possible that someone may not find it right for him or her then that person can go with some other ideology. Ultimately, we all have to come to the same place. If we see what we all are searching then only answer to this question is happiness with peace. In Bhagavad Gītā Lord Krushna says "aśāntasya kutah sukham." It means the person who is not in peaceful mood cannot be happy. It is true not only for theists but also for the people who do not believe in Krushna (God) or for the people who have different philosophy than Krushna (Muslims, Buddhists, Christians etc.). This is our everyday experience. So no matter what philosophy one follows it is essential for that person to be in peace. All philosophies whether they believe in God or not, whether they believe in soul or not, are only searching for peace. Even the science also, is in the search of ultimate theory of everything. If someone asks, what these scientists will do if one day they discover the theory of everything then obvious answer to this question will be they shall remain in peace. Now they are not in peace because they have understood that there are so many things in nature, which they do not understand, and it is making them restless and uneasy. That is why they are following the path of deepest possible observation of physical world so that they can come out with some explanation of this world.

Then question arises if I agree that everybody is searching for peace and people can reach this destination following other paths also then why do I try to prove Advaita the only superior philosophy than everything else. Answer to this question is I have tried to prove so because it is best for me as per my understanding of the life. Therefore, I have talked about it in this book. If someone else proves some other philosophy superior to Advaita then still it is ok with me. In fact, it does not matter. I have already reached a stage where I am in peace. Therefore, as far as I am concerned it can be said that my search for peace is over at least for now. I hope readers of this book will also reach their destination soon because this book provides all necessary ingredients.

This book was started by telling my experience of Consciousness but in rest of the book, there is hardly any discussion about my personal life. It is because I am a very ordinary person and my life is as ordinary as anybody else's life. I am not a great philosopher or a great scientist or great in any field. Therefore, there is no need for much discussion about my own life but still anybody is interested in knowing more about me then you can contact me personally

Aum śānti śānti śāntih

Back to Top

### About the Author

I am Saurabh A. Tambe, a disciple of Nāth Sampradāya in Maharashtra, India. Swāmi Saurabh Nāth is my pen name because I belong to Nāth tradition. In this name, the word 'Swāmi' is used for the person who is trying to master his own mind and senses. The word Nāth is used to show the discipleship of ancient tradition of Nāth mystics who have accomplished the job of mastering the mind and senses, and who have been able to realize the Brahman through the Advaita philosophy. I live in Phaltan, District Satara of Maharashtra. I do jobs of accounting to earn bread for my mother and me.

Connect with Swami Saurabhnath

Friend me on Facebook: <https://www.facebook.com/swamisaurabhnath>

For useful info and updates, follow me on Twitter at <https://twitter.com/swsaurabhnath>

You can contact me at - swamisaurabhnath@gmail.com

Please allow me around one month to respond because I cannot check my email regularly because of other obligations.

Thank you.

Other books by Swami Saurabhnath

Click on the links below to download the books

Bhagavad Gita - Pure \- A Comprehensive Study without Sectarian Contamination

Soham Yoga - A simple daily practice leading towards the peace and happiness

Messengers of Peace \- Similar Teachings of Jesus Christ and Lord Krishna

 Adhyātmasāra (in Marathi poetic form)

Disclaimer - I have written this book as per my current understanding of life, if my understanding of life changes in future then I am open to change my views that I have expressed in this book. This book is mainly intended to discuss about the Advaita Philosophy and its Enlightening process in which I am specially learned, so I take full responsibility of the statements I have made about the Advaita Philosophy. Information of various other philosophies, religions and scientific discoveries discussed in this book is true as per my knowledge; however, I am not specialized in them. Therefore, if somebody finds anything wrong then please contact me and I will discuss the issue, if there is any mistake in my understanding then I shall correct it and mention it in next edition of this book. Quotes of scientists in this book are collected from internet; I have done thorough search and study to collect them but still it is beyond my capacity to confirm their authenticity. - Saurabh.

Back to Top
