Wiki Vedanta - User contributions [en]

Brihadaranyaka Upanishad Ch.1.4 Lecture 25 on 18 April 2026

2026-07-03T22:33:07Z

Gopi: Added sanskrit mantras and minor edits

Full Transcript (Not Corrected)

== Opening Invocation ==
ॐ पूर्णमदः पूर्णमिदं पूर्णात्पूर्णमुदच्यते ।

पूर्णस्य पूर्णमादाय पूर्णमेवावशिष्यते ॥

ॐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः ॥

'''OM PŪRṆAMADAḤ PŪRṆAMIDAM PŪRṆĀT PŪRṆAMUDACYATE'''

'''PŪRṆASYA PŪRṆAMĀDĀYA PŪRṆAMEVA VAŚIṢYATE'''

'''OM ŚĀNTI ŚĀNTI ŚĀNTI'''

'''OM'''

That Brahman is infinite, and this universe is also infinite. The infinite proceeds from the infinite. Taking the infinitude of the infinite universe, it remains as the infinite Brahman alone.

OM Peace, Peace, Peace be unto all.
----

== Introduction: What is Love? ==
In our last class, we have started a most marvellous topic. And it is so appropriate. Why is it appropriate? Because nowadays, whether it is movies or it is songs or it is a dress or it is conversation, everybody is talking about love, love, love. Do people really understand what is the meaning of love? What is the psychology of love? What is the origin of love? What really a person loves, and why he cannot love?

Everyone is absolutely selfish. The word "selfish" has to be defined as one who is totally preoccupied with the self — one's own self — either from the lower point of view or from the highest point of view.

And this love is equivalent to joy, happiness, ānanda. Everyone only prays for ānanda: ''Asato mā, Tamaso mā, Mṛtyormā.'' So, "Let me live without any break. Let me have infinite knowledge. Let me be having infinite joy." So this is the topic.
----

== The Mantra: Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 1.4.8 ==
And this occurs in the first chapter of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad, fourth section, eighth mantra. And it doesn't really take away from the value, even if we recite it a few number of times.

तदेतत्प्रेयः पुत्रात्, प्रेयो वित्तात्, प्रेयोऽन्यस्मात्सर्वस्मात् अन्तरतरम्, यदयमात्मा । स योऽन्यमान्मनः प्रिये ब्रुवाणं ब्रूयात्, प्रियं रोत्स्यतीति, ईश्वरौ ह, तथैव स्यात्; आत्मानमेव प्रियमुपासीत; स य आत्मानमेव प्रियमुपास्ते न हास्य प्रियं प्रमायुकं भवति । । ८ । ।

tadetatpreyaḥ putrāt preyo vittātpreyo'nyasmātsarvasmādantarataraṁ yadayamātmā| sa yo'nyamātmanaḥ priyaṁ bruvāṇaṁ brūyāt priya rotsyatītīśvaro ha tathaiva syādātmānameva priyamupāsīta sa ya ātmānameva priyamupāste na hāsya priyaṁ pramāyukaṁ bhavati ||

Even the very positing of the Sanskrit words is most marvellous.

Plainly translated: this self is dearer than a son, dearer than wealth, dearer than everything else, because it is the innermost. So two points are beautifully outlined here. The self is dearer than a son, dearer than wealth, dearer than everything else. Why is it so? Because it is the innermost. It is the most wanted. It is the most desired. It is the most striven for.

Even a man wants to die sometimes — forever — only because when a person is deprived and loses all hope: "Perhaps I will never be happy in my entire life or lives. Then I cannot tolerate it."
----

== The Nature of Ātman and Ānanda ==
So we have already discussed a few points, but first I will go through the entire eighth section, eighth mantra of the fourth section, and then we will discuss further points. So there is nothing dearer than one's own self — that is the first point — and it is dearer than everything. And what is that Ātmā, one's own self? And everything other than one's own self is not dear at all. We will discuss about that point.

Such a person who loves one's own self, who realised that "I am the self, I am Brahman, and I am Ānanda Svarūpa" — such a person, looking at another person: who is this another person? There are only two types of persons in this world. One, those who love the self, Ātman, and those who love everything other than the Ātmā.

So, is there really — the question that comes, a very important question — is there really anybody in this world who doesn't love one's own self? Even if somebody says — say, a patriot, or a lover of the society, any society, irrespective of country, religion, language, etc. — and there are a few Mahātmās, great souls, who do that, like Mahātmā Gāndhi. So for them, there is nothing excluded. But the question is: is there anyone who can love anything in this world other than the Ātman?

Now when we use that word Ātman, the intended meaning that we want to discuss may not be clear. To make it clear, we have to use the appropriate words. Ānanda means — Ātmā means Ānanda. Ātmā and Ānanda are not separate things. So even the most worldly person, who doesn't believe in God, believes — because that is the very nature of a person — "I want to be happy, whether it comes from within or from outside."

So from that point of view, if Ātman is equated with Ānanda: Ātman is Brahman, Brahman is Sat, Cit, Ānanda. I already reminded you — these three words, Sat, Cit, and Ānanda, cannot be separated. Those three are not three separate words. If I feel happy, then that means I am alive, Sat. And if I am feeling happy, I have to be aware, I have to be conscious. "I am not an unhappy person, I am a happy person."
----

== The Distinction Between Worldly and Spiritual Love ==
Do people know about this? Then what is the difference between — one — everyone wants happiness. What is the difference, then, between a person who loves Ātman and one who doesn't? To put it in plain language, there are people who believe — and they don't use the word Ātman, it is a very special word and that is a better word, actually — but people use the word God. "I love God."

There are many people who might say, "I love God, we love God," but they don't really. They love God in order to get something from Him, and that is not true love. But all Ānanda comes only from God.

What is it? Ātmā is our own true nature. What is our true nature? Ānanda. ''Ānanda Svarūpaḥ. Śivoham Śivoham. Ānandoham Ānandoham. Sacidānandoham Sacidānandoham.'' So we love only Ānanda because that is my nature.

And here is a very, very important point: nobody loves anything else excepting oneself. If my nature is Ānanda, I love Ānanda naturally. I never love the opposite, or anything other than Ānanda. And anything other than Ānanda is called Duḥkha, Kaṣṭa, or Nirānanda. Nobody loves it.
----

== Why Nobody Loves Suffering ==
Why is it so? This is a universal law. Nobody loves Duḥkha. Nobody struggles, when one is happy, to get rid of happiness. But even the slightest difficulty — your leg is becoming painful in one particular position — immediately, unconsciously, you change it. Something is itching. Unconsciously, we stretch our hands to scratch and remove that feeling of itch, because itch means unhappiness, suffering, sorrow.

That is why Bhagavān Buddha's words have to be understood carefully. He said, "Life is nothing but sorrow." What does he mean? He means anything that is outside Ātman — that is what we call life. Life in the world, meaning body, mind, our circumstances, our family, our jobs, etc. And everybody is striving for more and more happiness.

So in this background, we have to understand: nobody loves anything other than Ānanda. What is our problem? Or what is the problem of a worldly person? A worldly person in Sanskrit is called ''Anātma Priya''. Does any person really love anything in this world? Not really. It seems he loves, but he doesn't.

But what is the psychology? The person thinks, "I want to be happy, and only this object can give me happiness." It could be husband, wife, children, parents, friends, anything else — possessions, bank balance, house, car, yacht — everything. So the person loves only Ānanda.
----

== The Two Things Everyone Loves ==
This is what we discussed. Everybody loves only two things. What are the things? First of all, everybody loves Ānanda and everybody desires only Ānanda. Why do you want to eat a sweet? Because you will get happiness. Why do you want to eat the best mango? Because you want to be happy.

What is the problem? If a person doesn't get what he loves, he will not love. If the same object — and every object is changing — so it might give happiness one time; it is conditional. We will discuss about it later on.

But a person loves, first of all, Ānanda; second, the object through which a person mistakenly thinks that he is getting happiness. And slowly we realise — because of our experiences, through our experiences — that really Ānanda is within ourselves. If we can train our mind to be happy, not to depend — and to understand that happiness doesn't lie in any object, happiness is not the nature of any object.
----

== The Nature of Happiness: The Test of Intrinsic Quality ==
How do we know? Because the definition of one's own nature is that which never is lost from oneself — like sweetness is not lost from sugar, and sourness is never lost from tamarind. So, like that, whatever is one's nature, that can never be lost. And whatever is lost is a mistaken identity, not real identity.

So, if an object has got happiness — and eternally that object should give happiness — what is the first problem? The object itself has a birth, has a growth, and has a death.

Simple analysis: suppose somebody loves a sweet mango. What type of mango? It should not be a small flower — pollen has turned into mango — nobody loves it. And the mango should go on growing, should go on acquiring sweetness, and it should be ripe properly. Then only will it give the sweetness. And some mangoes have an extraordinarily attractive flavour. So we are all creatures of smells — smelly persons. We love smells. In fact, the taste is nothing but 99% smell, and the rest is what we call sweet, sour, etc.

So any object doesn't have happiness because it has a birth, it becomes old — the mango becomes old, rotten. Nobody loves it. Only when it is in a particular condition, that is the first condition, will it be desirable, enjoyable.

Can anybody derive happiness from that fact? No. Because the enjoyer must fulfil certain conditions. He should be physically healthy, he should be healthy mentally, and there should be no circumstances which threaten that person. If somebody is sitting with a gun: "You eat this first-class mango, otherwise I blow your head into smithereens" — do you think the person will eat? But do you think he is enjoying? No, he knows.

Therefore, the external conditions must be right; the mango should be in the best condition; and his stomach must be in the best condition, at the best time. Even the healthiest person cannot enjoy anything at all times. So if you wake up a person who is deeply, terribly tired and deeply asleep — "I brought your favourite food, enjoy!" — he is likely to injure you for disturbing a greater happiness.

So so many conditions have to be fulfilled, and it should suit a person. Because even if these conditions are fulfilled, if that object doesn't love this man — this person, me or you — then we regret: "Why did I eat?" Because happiness should be such that before eating, after eating, it should leave a pleasant memory, a ''saṃskāra'' in the mind. But that is not going to happen in every case.
----

== The Two Categories of People ==
So the Upaniṣad divides people into two categories. And what is the point I brought out? Everybody loves Ānanda. There is no such thing as a believer in God or non-believer in God. But what is the distinction? A believer in God equates God with happiness. He says, "Since you are happiness, I will love you very naturally."

But suppose, hypothetically, you pray to God, He comes to you, and then He asks you graciously, "Ask a boon of me." And then you say, "I want to be very happy." But God says, "I can't give you happiness because I don't have it, but ask anything — money, jewels, house, best job, power, position, anything else, long life — I'll give you everything."

If we have studied the Kaṭha Upaniṣad, this was the conclusion that Naciketa had come to. Even Yamadharma Rāja says, "I will give you long life. You can enjoy rare objects which are not available on this earth. These heavenly damsels will serve you. Heavenly food will be served to you. Heavenly objects of enjoyment will be constantly at your service." But Yamadharma Rāja knows the psychology of love and Ānanda very well. So he was only testing Naciketa.

But Naciketa says, "All these are useless, because if my mind is disturbed — and the mind can be disturbed in umpteen number of ways — but here, definitely I will be disturbed. How so? Because I have an unfulfilled desire. I want to have self-knowledge. You are evading my question. You are not giving the answer. So without getting the answer, my desire will not be fulfilled. And this desire will be troubling me. And when one desire, a stronger desire, is troubling me, even the fulfilment of all other smaller desires is not going to help me."
----

== Erich Fromm and the Art of Loving ==
So once again we will talk very briefly about what we discussed, because this is one of the most wonderful topics. There was a great social psychologist. His name was Erich Fromm. And he wrote a marvellous book — a really great book — ''The Art of Loving.'' And in the last chapter, he summarises the whole book. But the essence of it — even he did not understand what is the nature of Ānanda, because he is talking purely from a psychological point of view. And he says, "It is an art." That is a great teaching we have to take.

It is an art to love anybody, and much less to speak about God — it is the greatest art. And nobody is going to be an artist unless that person fulfils certain hard conditions and for a long time. Then only such a person has a remote chance of becoming a great artist.

But Vedānta tells us: why do we love Ātman? Because Ātman is of the nature of happiness itself. And happiness requires that I should be alive, I should be existing, and I should be aware of it. Sat, Cit and Ānanda. This is the beautiful psychology.
----

== Even God Must Be Ānanda ==
So even people will not love God if God were to say, "You can have me, or you can have Ānanda, because I am not Ānanda." If God were to tell this to the devotee — how many devotees would say, "I don't care whether you are happiness or not, I will love you"?

But there are also saints. Caitanya Prabhu was one of them. Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa was one of them, who used to say, "I don't care whether you make me happy or unhappy. I don't care. But I love you." And why do these people love God? That is a question we have to put and get the answer.

Because: "Whether you give me happiness or not, I don't care. But by loving you" — loving means deriving, squeezing the greatest happiness. If any person is foolish enough to say, "I love such and such, but I don't get happiness," he doesn't know what he is talking about. We love only Ānanda. And we don't love what is not giving Ānanda.

But this giving Ānanda — it is a mistake to think it is coming from outside. I am creating Ānanda by creating a particular mental, psychological environment where I say, "I derive the greatest joy." That is what Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa says.
----

== Nobody Loves Anybody: The Example of the Rich Man ==
Nobody loves anybody. He gives a beautiful example. And we have to study the teachings of Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa in the light of the scriptures. What is the benefit? When the scriptures are understood better, Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa is also understood better.

Suppose there is a rich man. Two sorts of people visit him. One sort of people want to get something from the rich man. They praise him, they extol him, and they say, "You are the moon, you are the sun, you are the greatest." But the rich man is intelligent enough to know that these people are selfish — "They want to get something. They are only praising me to get something. They don't really love me." He will say, "Now you get up and go away."

But there are people — if you ask, "Why are you coming here? What do you want?" — who says, "I don't want anything from you. I just love to see you. I love to be with you. I don't want anything from you." And then the rich man will be very happy: "Here is a true lover."
----

== The Sufi Story of Identity in Love ==
It is identity — which again, if you remember, Swami Vivekānanda's Sufi story. A lover once knocked at the door of the beloved. From within came the question, "Who are you?" He said, "It is me." Second time he knocked. Same question, same answer. Third time he knocked. The same question came. This time, he understood. He says, "It is thee, my beloved. It is not me. It is thee." That means: "I love thee. I am there only to love you." That is true love. And then he found there are no doors — there is no door at all. This is the door that is keeping us away from God, from everybody else.

And when Jesus Christ proclaims, "Love thy God with all thy heart, with all thy soul, and love thy neighbour with all thy soul, with all thy heart" — how come? Because that is the Jñāni's love. The Jñāni doesn't see any difference. If God created, He is the creation. And His creation is only God with name and form, as we discussed. And therefore, loving any object is loving God. But we must be continuously aware of that. "I don't love an object as an object. I love an object as a manifestation of Brahman." That is what it is.
----

== The Jñāni's Warning: What Is Not the Self Will Perish ==
Let us complete the next part of the mantra.

स योऽन्यमान्मनः प्रिये ब्रुवाणं ब्रूयात्, प्रियं रोत्स्यतीति, ईश्वरौ ह, तथैव स्यात्; आत्मानमेव प्रियमुपासीत;

If one — another person — holding the self dear, what to say to another person who says, "I love everything else other than the self as dear"? Then the knower of God, the knower of the self, if he were to say, "You will lose what you hold dear" — and this knower of Brahman is certainly competent to do so — "it will indeed come true."

Very simple. That is: everything other than God is ephemeral, it changes. A knower of Brahman need not come and say, "So your family members will die. Your body will die. You will also die. Your property also." Actually, it is not necessary to say all this. When a person says, "You will die," that means the whole world will be dead with the death of one's own body.

So, anybody who says "I don't love God, I love the world" — whatever he loves will come to an end. And love means happiness, so whatever happiness he is getting will come to an end. And for that, one need not die. Death means limitation.

So, if there is a beautiful mango at this moment, after three days it may become old, rotten. So that ripe mango is, actually, a dead mango — therefore it loses its capacity to make me happy. Or, my stomach has gone bad. Any number of best mangoes or sweets, or money, or any number of people loving such a person, will not — cannot — make that person happy. What does that show? I'''t shows that when I remove my desires, then I remain as myself. And that is the state of highest happiness.'''
----

== The Evidence of Deep Sleep ==
And how do we know? Because in deep sleep, we don't get all these things. There is no object, there is no mind — which means there is no waking state, there is no dream state. That means time, space, and causation are completely removed. Then the person feels unlimited, and then he abides in his own self. That is why, uninterruptedly, we forget time, we forget space, we forget causation. That is called forgetfulness of the world. And that gives the greatest peace.

Man will die for the sake of this sleep. Somebody had said — a wise crack had said — that life is meant only for this kind of deep sleep. That is why it is called Ānandamaya Kośa — and for Ānanda only.

So this part of the mantra says: "O my fellow, love God." Instead of saying "love God," in Purāṇic language it says "love the Ātman," because Ātman — you are the Ātman. So you are not loving anybody. You are loving your own self. But other than your own self, everything is perishable. Perishable means it is limited.

So even if an object is in front of us, at one time we loved it because the limitations were less. Now we hate the same object. We may even turn away our attention, our eyes. We may even hate — and this applies even to God also. So you claim, "I love God." But if God fails to provide safety, security, and happiness, the person will gladly, hastily remove God from his very house, from his very mind: "This God is a useless God." So we are all utilitarians.

So whether a Jñāni tells the worldly person that "what you hold here will die" — there is no need to say. That is happening every millisecond of our life, because our body is changing, our mind is changing, and along with that the external world — everything in this world is changing. Changefulness is the very nature of the world. That is why a great philosopher had said that no man steps into the same river twice.
----

== ''Ātmānam Eva Priyam Upāsīta'': Meditate on the Self Alone as Dear ==
Then what should we do?

स य आत्मानमेव प्रियमुपास्ते न हास्य प्रियं प्रमायुकं भवति । । ८ । ।

''Ātmānam eva priyam upāsīta'' — one should meditate upon the self alone as dear. And what is that self? It is infinite. It is one. It is one without a second. And there is no fear, because there is no second. And what is its nature? Sat, Cit, Ānanda — immortality, infinite knowledge, unbroken happiness. That is the nature of the Ātman.

But we may not understand it. So we must have faith in the words of the scripture. But we will not have faith in the words of the scripture just like that — for that we have to choose a person after examination. "This person is an unselfish person. He loves you even if you have nothing to offer. And he is ready to sacrifice his life for your sake." And we have to understand through these signs that he is a knower of Brahman, because his love is not worldly love. His love is: "I love you because you are you." No — "I love you because I am you. There is nobody else other than the Ātman. I am the Ātman. Therefore there is no you, or she, or it, or anything else."

That is why — better understand this — "O Bhṛgu" — or here, disciple: ''Ātmānam eva priyam upāsīta.'' Ātman is the dearest, and it is also dearest because it is the nearest. Nearest means not some object which is near — it is nearer than the body, nearer than the mind. If these are destroyed, the pure consciousness will always be there, and "I am that pure consciousness — ''Śivoham Śivoham.''" Therefore you realise yourself, and then you will get infinite existence, infinite knowledge, infinite joy.
----

== ''Yaḥ Ātmānam Eva Priyam Upāste'': What the Jñāni Holds Dear Will Never Perish ==
स य आत्मानमेव प्रियमुपास्ते न हास्य प्रियं प्रमायुकं भवति । । ८ । ।

''Ya Ātmānam Eva Priyam Upāste, Na hi asya priyam pramāyukam bhavati'' — "He who meditates upon the self alone as dear: what he holds dear will not perish." A beautiful expression again. Why does what this person holds dear never perish? Because it is the imperishable Ātman, the deathless Ātman.

So ''yaḥ Ātmānam Eva Priyam'' — Ātman alone is ''Ānanda Sacidānanda Svarūpa'', and it is immortal. And that awareness "I am the Ātman" is called Cit. And he who realises it through Sādhana — ''Na hi asya priyam'' — what he holds dear, this Ātman, ''pramāyukam bhavati'' — it will never ever perish.

So we have already analysed a little bit, and then we go to the beginning. It is dearer than a son, dearer than wealth, dearer than everything else. So why is the Ātmā dearest? How is the Ātmā dearer than everything?
----

== The Mistake of Depending on Sense Objects ==
So we have also discussed — I will only briefly remind you — that every creature, every living creature, of course human being better than anybody else, loves only two things. First, he wants to be happy — she wants, he wants — everybody. Secondly, by mistake, we all think this Ānanda is coming through the objects of the five sense organs — beautiful sound, beautiful form, beautiful smell, beautiful taste, and beautiful weather, etc.

But Vedānta tells that we all mistakenly think these five objects of the five sense organs are giving or containing happiness, and therefore they are giving me happiness. As we discussed earlier, this is a mistaken notion. Why? Because every object has a birth, what is called sustenance or duration, and it will die. Therefore, to depend upon something which can be for a second — and it includes our own body as an instrument, our own mind — nothing can be depended upon.

But there is something which has no birth, no death, and that is called the Ātmā. So, only two things: we only love happiness, and temporarily we love that object which we think is giving me happiness. Of these two, which is the best? Happiness alone is primary, and every other sense object is secondary. And why do I like happiness? Because that is my very nature. Because when am I happy? I am happy only when I am myself.
----

== The Pañcakośas as a Journey Toward the Ātman ==
That is why: when I identify myself with the Annamaya Kośa, I am a happy person. When I identify myself with Virāṭ, I am even more happy. Then I discover there is the Annamaya Kośa — even Virāṭ is far from Ātmā. But there is something nearer to that Ātmā.

Just as when we approach a blazing fire, even from a distance we start feeling the heat, and the heat goes on increasing — in a similar way, as we approach the Ātman, our happiness also will increase. So when we discard the Annamaya Kośa and identify with Prāṇamaya Kośa, I am a bit nearer to the Ātman, and so on.

When I move to the Manomaya Kośa — the mind, thoughts — in fact, our thoughts make everything. A poor man can be happy if he has happy thoughts. A rich man is unhappy in spite of everything he has, because of the poor thought or poverty-stricken thought: "I am not happy." That is the worst type of thought anybody can have.

And when the person moves to the Vijñānamaya, he is even nearer to the Ātman. When he moves to the Ānandamaya, he is still nearer — only a thin layer is the obstruction. That is why, after entering the Ānandamaya Kośa, he comes to realise: "I am not a kośa. I am Ānanda."

At the level of the Ānandamaya Kośa, a person clearly realises this is a kośa — and as soon as one realises what is kośa — that which limits — no man wants a limitation. So immediately he will cut it off. Then, from Ānandamaya Kośa, if we remove the Kośa, what remains? Ānanda. That is why: ''Ānando hyātmā. Brahma Pucchaṃ Pratiṣṭhā.''
----

== The Conditionality of Worldly Love ==
So I love the means of happiness only because it gives me happiness. I love any object so long as it gives me happiness, and the moment it stops giving happiness, I give up loving it — I may even cherish hatred. Look at your everyday life. Whether a husband loses his love for the wife, or a wife loses her love for the husband, or for the children, or for anything in this world — friends are given up, religion is given up, even ultimately God also is given up if I don't get that happiness.

And then, what is the psychology? Once I gain happiness through any object, that object itself loses its importance. Like — as I gave the example — when a person sucks all the sweetness from a sugarcane, he throws it out as obstruction, as rubbish. He just throws it as far a distance as possible.

So our desire for happiness is unlimited and unconditional love, whereas my love for any object — which I mistakenly think gives me happiness — is absolutely conditional. That condition is: "So long as it gives." Whether it gives more or whether it gives less — the less giving, we love less; the more giving, we love more. That is the condition.

But from the Śāstra, from the Guru, we learn that Ātmā alone is happiness, and everything else other than Ātmā is called Anātmā. Anātmā is unhappiness, because the happiness of the Ātmā is its very nature. So it is ''Ekaṃ Sat, Ekam Eva Advitīyam.'' That is why Ātman is eternal, Ātman is secondless — therefore it gives eternal happiness.

So children, possessions, house, everything — the whole world — belong to the realm of Anātmā. And whatever is Anātmā is going to change, and every change is called perishing or death. So why is Anātmā unhappiness? Because it is limited and conditional. Simple example: you buy a car — so long as it serves your purpose, you love it; the moment it doesn't, you give it up. So the same thing applies to God also. Nobody will love even God selflessly.
----

== The Love of the Saint: Unconditional and Undifferentiated ==
But if we find a saint who loves God unconditionally, we have to understand a very important point here: his very love for God gives him the greatest happiness, whether God is of the nature of love or not. It doesn't matter. And the same thing applies to worldly love also: if we think this person gives me happiness — whether that person really gives happiness or not, materially — my thinking, "I derive great happiness," my thought that "this person gives me happiness" — that is the only thing that gives happiness. That means I am generating happiness from within myself.

Now a question comes here. The Upaniṣad says a Jñāni loves everybody. A lover, a saint, loves everybody without any differentiation. The four conditions: he loves everybody unconditionally, and he is ready to sacrifice everything, he doesn't make the slightest distinction, and he is ready to undergo any suffering for helping the other person. And the greatest — a saint is always happy whether there are any objects or no objects. In his eyes, the person will not value one object more than the other object, because he starts seeing God everywhere.

So a Jñāni's love is, from one point of view, selfish love. What does it mean? "I love you," a Jñāni says, "because I am you." That is called: "I love you for my sake, because I know I am you, you are me." And a Jñāni is therefore the opposite. Therefore a Jñāni can say boldly: "Whatever you love is going to be destroyed." Why? Because the you who is the lover is also limited, and the object which you claim to love is also limited.

Remember: a subject cannot exist without an object, neither can an object exist without a subject. That division — they both are dependent upon each other. So both will die. But a Jñāni doesn't say "I am the subject," neither does he say "I am the object" — he rises beyond the borders of both subject and object.

Therefore, we must know: everything is the Ātmā. "All that exists in this universe is myself alone." A Jñāni has neither friend nor enemy. In fact, there is no second object that exists for a Jñāni. And a Jñāni — that is a Jīvanmukta — seems to love even an enemy. But how does he love? Not as an object, an Anātmā, but as Ātmā — oneself. That is why Jesus says, "Forgive the enemies, because there are no enemies" — that is what he did not say explicitly. So this is the difference between a Jñāni and a non-Jñāni.
----

== How Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa and Holy Mother Loved ==
And how and why did Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa and Holy Mother love their devotees? These people admire us — so they naturally, like a worldly person, return their love. No — because everybody is looked upon as Ātman only. Often they do not express this, but Holy Mother says, "All are my children," when some topic is raised.

Because at that time, the freedom movement was going on, and the argument was that cloth produced in western countries should not be used — only Svadeśī Khāddara, Khādī. Then Holy Mother said, "No, they are also my children," because she will never wish anybody to suffer. They are her children — therefore if anybody suffers, she suffers. Even if a cat suffers, she suffers. "What about a snake?" — yes, that is also true.

But we see in Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa what seems a contradiction — we have to understand it properly. Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa said, "I could not sleep for three days after Keśav passed away." Is it a worldly love? No. Why? Because Keśav was an instrument of the Divine Mother. It is because of Keśav, through Keśav, Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa came to be known, became popular, and so many people could come to him. And even the followers of the Brahmo Samāj, members, also deserted Keśav Candra Sen — albeit he does not know why it is so — but Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa never loves anybody, cannot love anybody, as separate from himself. This is called Brahman's love, the love of the Ātman.

So we have to understand: every saint, direct disciples, great devotees — there is no distinction between whom they love, etc.
----

== Conclusion: The Eternal Happiness of the Jñāni ==
So, in the end, the Upaniṣad says that whoever worships this Ātman — the Jñāni — gains eternal happiness, happiness free from all limitations, and that is also called Mokṣa. So if a person of lesser preparedness slowly practises Sādhana and progresses in Sādhana, and in the end becomes identified with Brahman, and if he is still functioning through this body-mind, he will be called a Jīvanmukta. For him: ''Ānandaṃ Ānandaṃ Paramānandaṃ.''

This is the essence of this eighth mantra in the fourth section. And in our next class, the most marvellous topic of Brahma Vidyā is taken up. There are two more in this fourth section — Mantra 9 and Mantra 10 — and upon these two, Śaṅkarācārya writes an elaborate Bhāṣyam. And I will give you the gist of that Bhāṣyam in our next class.
----

== Closing Prayer ==
''ॐ'' जननीं शारदां देवीं रामकृष्णं जगद्गुरुम् ।

पादपद्मे तयोः श्रित्वा प्रणमामि मुहुर्मुहुः ॥

''Om Jananīṁ Śāradāṃ Devīṃ Rāmakṛṣṇaṃ Jagadgurum''

''Pada Padme Tayo Śṛtvā Praṇamāmi Muhur Muhuh''

May Sri Ramakrishna, Holy Mother, and Swami Vivekananda bless us all with bhakti.

'''Jai Ramakrishna!'''
[[Category:Brihadaranyaka Upanishad]]

Brihadaranyaka Upanishad Ch.1.4 Lecture 26 on 19 April 2026

2026-07-03T21:53:28Z

Gopi: Added sanskrit mantras and minor edits

Full Transcript (Not Corrected)

== Opening Invocation ==

ॐ पूर्णमदः पूर्णमिदं पूर्णात्पूर्णमुदच्यते ।

पूर्णस्य पूर्णमादाय पूर्णमेवावशिष्यते ॥

ॐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः ॥

'''OM PŪRṆAMADAḤ PŪRṆAMIDAM PŪRṆĀT PŪRṆAMUDACYATE'''

'''PŪRṆASYA PŪRṆAMĀDĀYA PŪRṆAMEVA VAŚIṢYATE'''

'''OM ŚĀNTI ŚĀNTI ŚĀNTI'''

'''OM'''

That Brahman is infinite, and this universe is also infinite. The infinite proceeds from the infinite. Taking the infinitude of the infinite universe, it remains as the infinite Brahman alone.

OM Peace, Peace, Peace be unto all.

== Recap: The Psychology of Love and the Ātman ==
In our last class, we discussed and completed the psychology of love. What is true love?

'''तदेतत्प्रेयः पुत्रात्, प्रेयो वित्तात्, प्रेयोऽन्यस्मात्सर्वस्मात् अन्तरतरम्, यदयमात्मा ।'''

स योऽन्यमान्मनः प्रिये ब्रुवाणं ब्रूयात्, प्रियं रोत्स्यतीति, ईश्वरौ ह, तथैव स्यात्; आत्मानमेव प्रियमुपासीत; स य आत्मानमेव प्रियमुपास्ते न हास्य प्रियं प्रमायुकं भवति । । ८ । ।

'''''Tad etat preyaḥ putrāt, preyo vittāt, preyo'nyasmāt sarvasmāt, tad antarataraṃ yad ayam Ātmā'' ||'''

The Self is dearer than a son, dearer than wealth, dearer than everything else, because it is the innermost. We also have to add: the self is dearer than the body, than the mind.

How come? Because if the body stops giving happiness and starts giving unhappiness, then we earnestly pray to God: "Let this body be dropped away." Similarly, when the mind is highly disturbed, creating only the feeling of suffering, we want to overcome it — either by drinking, or by diverting our attention. If nothing works, then by going to the deep sleep state. So long as we are in that deep sleep state, nothing in this universe can really trouble us. We are not even aware.

And this statement — that in deep sleep there is no body consciousness, there is no awareness of the mind — clearly indicates that what we call happiness, unhappiness, and both of them together; good and evil; birth and death — everything belongs to the mind in the form of thoughts, and has nothing to do with Ātman. And without any object, we experience the highest bliss. That bliss is beyond both happiness and unhappiness.
----

== The Difference Between Bliss and Happiness ==
Many times we commit the terrible mistake of identifying this bliss with continuous happiness. These concepts are completely different — opposite to each other. Happiness always comes with unhappiness. It is sandwiched happiness. Joy, pleasure, is sandwiched between not having happiness before, and not having happiness or pleasure later on. Therefore, it is called Anātmā.

And as we discussed, Anātmā can never be dear to everybody. We want unbroken happiness, which is called peace, Śānti. And that is what we experience in deep sleep.
----

== The Meaning of ''Ahaṃ Brahmasmi'' ==
Then the mantra goes on telling that if a person understands "I am the very embodiment of bliss, because I am the Ātman" — because the Ātman is — sometimes these English words like "the Ātman" do not make much meaning unless we come to the definition, add the definition. Simply saying "I am Ātman" is meaningless. "I am Brahman" is meaningless. What should we say then? "I am Sacidānanda Ātmā. I am Satyam Jñānam Anantam Brahma." Then it makes meaning.

"I am Sat — I have no death. I am Cit — I have no ignorance. And I am Ānanda Svarūpa." What type of Ānanda? ''Anantam'' — infinite happiness, infinite bliss. Therefore, these words only we have to keep in mind.
----

== The Realised Soul and the Perishing of Anātmā ==
So if there is a person — what we call, in popular language, a realised soul, like Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa, Swami Vivekānanda, etc. — then if these people give the teaching to other people whose happiness lies in Anātmā, obtaining Anātmā, experiencing Anātmā, enjoying or suffering from Anātmā — "that whatever you love is going to perish" — then is a Brahma Jñānī going to tell these words to other people? No.

What it means is: "My children, everything in this world is temporary." That word "temporary" means it was not before, it will not be later on — only momentarily it is there. That conveys the same idea: that if a great realised soul has to tell his students, "What you hold as dear will perish" — whether he says it or whether he doesn't say it, Anātmā is going to perish.

In fact, it is not going to perish at some future time. If you analyse deeply, after some time — because we have got these superficial understandings — there is birth, there is sustenance. For example, here is a person. He is born 99 years back. So he was born and he is continuing to live, and at the 100th year or so, he is going to die. Imagine like that.

It is a wrong concept that for 99 years or 100 years, this person is continuously in the same state. Every millisecond, our bodies are changing. Minds are changing. Change is another name for death. We have to be using this terminology with clear understanding: "I am dying. My body is dying. My mind is dying. Therefore, I — who associate with the body-mind — am also dying." If I go on being aware of these facts, then definitely there would be progress in spiritual life.
----

== Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa on Weeping for God ==
That is what Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa, in so many words, conveys: that people shed potfuls of tears at the death or separation or enmity of what they hold dear — wife, husband, children, friends, etc. But who is going to weep for God?

This is the translation by Swāmī of Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa's words — that the scripture and a realised soul are one and the same. If the scripture were to tell us that what you hold dear will perish — or, even better language: is perishing every second — that would be the correct translation. Then it is not that the person is telling. If he doesn't tell, there is no perishing; if he tells, then only perishing starts — no. He is only stating a statement of fact: "This is what is happening. Be aware of it." That is what it meant.

So you will be weeping. Why? Because the truth is, Anātmā actually doesn't exist. But because you think it exists, nonexistence will be nonexistence only — whether you think it is existent or nonexistent.
----

== ''Ātmānam Eva Priyam Upāsīta'': Meditate Upon the Self Alone as Dear ==
Therefore, what is the conclusion?

आत्मानमेव प्रियमुपासीत;

''Ātmānam eva priyam iti upāsīta'' — one should meditate upon the self alone as dear.

"As dear" means what? Like Jaḍa Bharata, who became the deer by loving the dear — he loved that perishable object, and in the next birth he himself was imbued with that saṃskāra. And he realised: "What for did I come and where did I end? I was thinking of God until the moment I perceived this young one lying down after its mother's death." So immediately he took it up. That tremendous power of concentration on God now turned upon this so-called helpless object.

That is why we all love babies so much — because they are whole for some time. That means, if they feel like weeping, they weep; if they feel like laughing, they laugh. There is no hypocrisy there. They become one with their feelings, whereas we learn how to hide our feelings. Rarely do we become one with our feelings.

When I mean — "I am so happy to see you get a promotion, win a lottery ticket, get married to a great person, or land a wonderful job" — genuinely, only a few family members, not every family member, may feel happy about it. Jealousies will come. But a Brahma Jñānī will be happy with the happiness of everybody. And a Brahma Jñānī will feel tremendous sympathy, as if he himself is suffering.
----

== Holy Mother's Compassion ==
Holy Mother's incident — I hope you will recollect. Once a poor old woman came to Holy Mother and started weeping inconsolably. Holy Mother did not know the reason. She asked, and the old woman said, "My young son — only son, upon whom I was hoping against hope that when I become old he will take up a job and look after me, and he would have looked after me — suddenly he died." And Holy Mother burst into equal sobbing. Both of them started sobbing.

What happened? Holy Mother felt: "This is my son who has really died." So every Brahma Jñānī, as we discussed earlier, identifies everybody as one's own, as my own self. There is no pretence about it, there is no artificiality in it. So we have to understand. But how does he love? Not as Anātmā, but as Ātmā. And Ātmā is only one. Therefore, there is no difference.

"Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thine own self" — this is what Bhagavān Jesus Christ is trying to tell.
----

== The Result of Meditating on the Ātman ==
Therefore, what is the result?

आत्मानमेव प्रियमुपासीत; स य आत्मानमेव प्रियमुपास्ते न हास्य प्रियं प्रमायुकं भवति |

''Ātmānam eva priyam upāsīta'' — one should meditate upon the self alone as dear. And what does he get by that Upāsanā?

''ya Ātmānam eva priyam upāste, na hi asya priyaṃ pramāyukam bhavati'' — he who meditates upon the self alone as dear, what he holds as dear will not perish.

Because what he is holding as dear is the Ātman. And he holds it as: "You are the Ātman. I am contemplating upon you." No — "I am you. So there is no I and you. What is, is only one." So that is the result. What else do we want? And Ātman is of the nature of unending, unbroken, eternal, infinite bliss.
----

== We All Love Only the Ātman ==
So we all love only Ātman. Even the worldly person doesn't love any object — let us remember it. First we love happiness. And if any object is giving me happiness, I love that object as a secondary love. Primary love always belongs to happiness. And secondary love belongs to that instrument, that object, through which I can derive that happiness.

And that is why one's own happiness, one's own nature, is the nearest and dearest. Ātman is the nearest to all of us, because all of us are Ātman. That is not a proper language — there is no "all." But we have to use it, because at this moment we are living in a world where I think I am one among this infinite number of objects. Therefore, there is no "all." Everything is only one Ātman.

Like a thousand reflections in a mirror — if one person stands before a thousand mirrors, there will be as many reflections as the number of mirrors. But depending upon the quality of the mirror — some may be convex, some may be concave, whatever it is — and some may be very clean, some may be covered with a small amount of dust, and some may be covered with full dust — so the reflections will vary only depending upon the quality of the mirrors. And our minds are like mirrors. That is what Patañjali in his Yogaśāstra says:

''citta vṛtti nirodha'' — make the mind pure. Pure means there should be no other thought other than that. Then what happens? Thereafter we dwell upon it without any break.

How so? Because what we are looking for from birth to death is not an object but happiness. And here is infinite bliss. Therefore, the Yogī doesn't want to have any interruption: "I am of the nature of happiness. That is what I am — the Ātman." And Ātman also is the dearest because it is the nearest to every one of us. Here, "nearest" means not something which is near in terms of time, distance, space, or objective distance. That is: "I am the Ātman and Ātman I am" — in that sense only. And therefore, ''Aham Sacidānanda Svarūpaḥ.'' That is what we have to understand. Everything other than the Ātman perishes.
----

== Structure of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad ==
This is the essence of Mantra 8, in the fourth section of the first chapter of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. Now the next two mantras — the 9th and 10th — are the very essence of this Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad.

We said at the beginning, in the introduction, that the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad is divided into six chapters. And every two chapters — 1st and 2nd, 3rd and 4th, 5th and 6th — are given particular names.

The first two chapters go by the name of Upadeśa Kāṇḍa, or Madhu Kāṇḍa. Why is it called Madhu? Madhu means honey. Honey means what? Everything is Brahman. "I am, I love Ātman. And what is everything? Everything is also nothing but Ātman. Since I love the Ātman, therefore everything is Ātman. Therefore I love everything as my one single infinite self." That is why everybody becomes dear. For a Brahma Jñānī, there are neither friends nor enemies, neither nearer nor distant people. There is only one reality: ''Brahma Eva Asti'' — there is nothing but Brahman. That is what is said in the 6th chapter of the Chāndogya Upaniṣad also: ''Sadeva Saumya idam agre āsīt'' — Sat, pure existence, pure knowledge, pure bliss, Sacidānanda. Which the 2nd chapter of the Taittirīya Upaniṣad, Brahmanandavalī, defines, changing one word: ''Satyam, Jñānam, Anantam.''

* The word ''Satyam'' corresponds to Sat.
* The word ''Jñānam'' corresponds to Cit.
* And the word ''Anantam'' corresponds to Ānanda — unbroken, unlimited, which means infinite.

And here he has used the word ''Anantam'' in the Brahmanandavalī.
----

== The Progressive Ānanda of the Kośas ==
So there would be a desire. After going through the ritualistic portions, etc., and slowly as the mind becomes purer,

first a person develops and progresses: "I want happiness in this world."

Second, he progresses further: "I want higher happiness, obtainable in the higher lokas." We can also equate that the Ānanda which one gets in the Prāṇamaya Kośa is much subtler, more pervading, and more happiness.

Because remember: the Ānandamaya Kośa, only when it becomes a little bit covered up, is called Vijñānamaya. A little more covered up — or grossened, becoming gross, meaning covered up more and more — it becomes Manomaya. And it becomes more covered up, which is called Prāṇamaya.

So I can put it this way: one obtains some amount of happiness in Annamaya Kośa, one obtains more happiness in Prāṇamaya Kośa, higher than that in Manomaya Kośa, higher than that in Vijñānamaya Kośa, and higher than that in Ānandamaya Kośa.

And finally — all these are, remember, finite. Finite because: "I enjoy this object called Annamaya. Similarly Prāṇamaya, similarly Manomaya, Vijñānamaya, and similarly Ānandamaya." When I am still making all these Pañcakośas — considering them, classifying them — as Anātmā, what does Anātmā mean? Different from me, because of ignorance. But all these are manifestations of that one single Ātmā.

''Ānandaṃ'' — it is Ānandaṃ, and Ānandamaya Kośa is both Ātman and Anātman. That is how we have to say it. However great the Ānanda we derive from the Ānandamaya Kośa, it is still finite only. So just try to imagine, if you can — you try to compare the great happiness, finite happiness, with the infinite. There is no comparison at all. So therefore this one has to realise. That is why it is called Upadeśa Kāṇḍa.
----

== The Three Kāṇḍas ==
So the first two chapters — 1st and 2nd — are called Upadeśa Kāṇḍa.

And the 3rd and 4th are called Muni Kāṇḍa, Yājñavalkya Kāṇḍa, because Yājñavalkya plays the central role of the Paramāguru who teaches to various people — especially to two people: one, his own wife Maitreyī, and second, the greatest of all these kings, Janaka Mahārāja.

And then the last two chapters are called Khila Kāṇḍa — an assortment of Upāsanās, and helpful Upāsanās, where how we can obtain or sacralise — make everything sacred — by doing certain types of rituals combined with certain types of contemplations.

So why am I giving this long introduction? Because these mantras — the 9th and 10th in this fourth section of the first chapter of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka — are the very essence. And here only we get that famous, most popular Mahāvākya: ''Ahaṃ Brahmāsmi.'' And this is confirmed.

As I said, please keep in mind always: the first and second chapters form the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad as if the very essence of all the scriptures — ''Brahma Satyam, Jagat Mithyā.'' And that ''Brahma Satyam'' is expressed here as ''Ahaṃ Brahmāsmi.'' It comes in the tenth mantra, the next mantra.
----

== Mantra 9: The Seekers' Question ==
But the ninth mantra is a question raised by certain seekers of Ātma Vidyā or Brahma Jñānam. The answer is given in the tenth. And it continues until the second chapter, third section, sixth mantra, where it says: "What is the way?" So here, the Mahāvākya — "You are Brahman" — all right, I believe in it. But how do I know that I am Brahman? I have to get rid of Ajñāna. How do I get rid of my ignorance?

And that is where, in the second chapter, third section, sixth mantra, comes the most famous Sādhana: ''neti neti'' — "not this, not this." Every Anātmā has to be negated. That is, in popular words: "I am not the waker. I am not the dreamer. I am not the sleeper." In the Taittirīya Upaniṣad: "I am not the Annamaya to Ānandamaya Pañcakośas." And when I deny, what remains — that is called ''Satyam.''
----

== Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa's Analogy of ''Neti Neti'' ==
Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa symbolises this through a beautiful analogy. It was midnight. A servant had to urgently find his master. So he enters into a room — a big room full of objects. But he knows the master is sleeping: "I have to find him out." Perhaps the servant has never entered this room. So there is no light also.

So the person goes on touching: "Not this." "This is not my master." So he touches a pillar, maybe a table, maybe something else. Ultimately, he touches the bed. "This is the bed." So in the bedroom, the bed is the place where the master has to be found. So he touches the master. "So, after denying everything, negating everything, what remains? This is the master."

This is what Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa wants to convey through that explanation of that word ''neti neti.'' So the servant went on saying: "Not this, not this." And after negating everything, what remains? That is called the master. Here in this analogy, the servant is the seeker and the master is none other than Brahman. This is what we have to understand.
----

== A Brief Translation of Mantras 9 and 10 ==
So very briefly, let me read out, before I give an introduction to both the 9th and 10th mantras.

तदाहुः, यत ‘ब्रह्मविद्यया सर्वं भविष्यन्तः ’मनुष्या मन्यन्ते । किमु तद्ब्रह्मावेद्यस्मात्तत्सर्वमभवदिति ।। ९ ।।

''Tad āhuḥ'' — they say. Who says? There were some seekers — earnest seekers of Brahma Vidyā. They came to know from Guru Upadeśa, from their own logical reasoning, from their own worldly experience: "Everything is Anātmā. Anātmā means Anitya. Anitya means unreliable. Unreliable means everything is full of suffering, sooner or later. So therefore we want to go to, or know, that by knowing which, we will be ''Satyam Jñānam Anantam Brahma.'' I can claim: I am Brahman. ''Ahaṃ Brahmāsmi.''" That is where this question in the 9th mantra is going to lead.

So these people were discussing, and then they were telling: ''yad brahma vidyayā sarvaṃ bhaviṣyantīti manuṣyā manyante'' — "Men think: through the knowledge of Brahman, we shall become all." So these people said: "We all heard about Brahma Vidyā, especially from the scriptures, and our teachers also say the same thing. What is that? There are ''manuṣyāḥ'' — people. What people? Not ordinary people, but people who have realised Brahman — their declaration, like Vāmadeva: ''so aham sarvaṃ abhavam'' — 'I have become everything.'"

So: ''brahma vidyayā sarvaṃ bhaviṣyantīti'' — by obtaining the knowledge of Brahman, we become everything. Because besides Brahman, there is nothing else. ''Satyam Jñānam Anantam Brahma.'' So people are convinced. They are teaching the same thing. Here, "men think" — not ordinary men, but seekers, earnest sincere seekers like Naciketa — think that if we can get the knowledge of Brahman, through the knowledge of Brahman, we shall become all. That means what? "We will have no death. We will have no ignorance. And our bliss will be unbroken."

''Kim u tat brahma avet?'' — "Now that Brahma, what did it know? I am all. So by what knowledge? What did that Brahman know? That it became everything." Well then, what did that Brahman know, through which it became all?

''Asmāt tat sarvam abhavat iti'' — "Because of which it became all." That means: ''Ekam, Sat, Satyam Jñānam Anantam.'' So it became — rather it understood: "I am ''Satyam'', deathless. I am ''Jñānam'', ignorance-less. I am ''Anantam'' — infinite, unbroken bliss." How did Brahman come to know about it? Because if Brahman came to know about it, then if we follow what Brahman did to become all, then we also will come to know about it.

As I said, beautiful explanations will come later on. So, with this, the answer is given in the 10th mantra.
----

== Summary of the 10th Mantra: ''Ahaṃ Brahmāsmi'' ==
And then, what is the summary of this 10th mantra? So here also, there are beautiful Sanskrit mantras, which we will very briefly, and only selected, we will study now, just to get a glimpse.

You know, it is like a famous speaker is going to speak. Every famous speaker or writer is famous because they are great. And how did they become great? Because the greater a person, the clearer he will be — either while speaking or writing. There would be no ambiguity. Study Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa, study Swami Vivekānanda, and study some of the scholars — you will understand what difference there is. Rāmakṛṣṇa can explain the most profound truths with the simplest analogies.

So the essence of these answers given here: what is it? First, so, you have to become Brahma. What does it mean? ''Ahaṃ Brahmāsmi'' — I am Brahman. What does it mean? Not that you are not Brahman now, or in the past — and you are going to become Brahman in the future by some peculiar process, or action, Karma, or Upāsanā. No. Simply: you are, you were, you will be Brahman. But due to Ajñāna, Avidyā, you are thinking: "I am not Brahman."

That "I am not Brahman" is expressed as: "I am a man. I am a woman. I am a dog" — because even dogs are highly conscious that they are dogs, they are completely identified. A mosquito is completely identified: "I am a mosquito." How do you know? You interact with it, and it will let you know.
----

== The Preface of the Upaniṣad's Teaching ==
So, what is the conclusion? We are summarising both the 9th and 10th mantras as an introduction. I was talking about famous speakers or writers. What do they do? Every writer has a preface where, in crystal clear terms: "This is the subject I am going to discuss. These are the important points, and I am going to elaborate them and present before you what is called the explanations, and at the end again I will give you the conclusions." So by reading that preface, we can understand. The same thing is followed by speakers: "I am going to speak to you about these things."

This is how, here, we have to summarise. That is why I am giving the summary. And this summary is according to Advaita Vedāntic interpretation — please keep that in mind. Because the same Upaniṣads are also commented upon by Madhvācārya, Rāmānujācārya, and especially Rāmānujācārya's famous commentary on the Brahma Sūtras called ''Śrī Bhāṣyam'' — a beautiful name. But they don't accept Nirguṇa, Nirviśeṣa, Nirākāra Brahman. But Advaita alone accepts: Brahman alone is the only truth, and you cannot describe it.
----

== The Four-Part Summary of the Teaching ==
So therefore, what is the essence of it? What does it mean?

तद्धैतत्पश्यन्नृषिर्वामदेवः प्रतिपेदे, अहंमनुरभवं सूर्यश्चेति । तदिदमप्येतर्हि य एवं वेद, अहं ब्रह्मास्मीति, स इदं सर्वं भवति, तस्य ह न देवाश्चनाभूत्या ईशते। आत्मा ह्येषां स भवति; अथ योऽन्यां देवतामुपास्ते, अन्योऽसावन्योऽहमस्मीति, न स वेद, यथा पशुरेवं स देवानाम् । यथा ह वै बहवः पशवो मनुष्यं भुञ्ज्युः, एवमेकैकः पुरुषो देवान् भुनक्ति, एकस्मिन्नेव पशावादीयमानेऽप्रियं भवति, किमु बहुषु ? तस्मादेषां तन्न प्रियं यदेतन्मनुष्या विद्युः ।। १० ।।

'''First:''' Brahman alone, for some mysterious reason, is caught in the net of Avidyā or ignorance, and it enters into this Anātmā, this ''jagat'', creation. Creation is called Anātmā. This world is called Anātmā. Anything that doesn't remind us of God — that is called Anātmā. Anything that makes a difference — "I am different from you" — that is called Anātmā. So that Brahman forgot its Brahmanhood, and through ignorance, it is thinking: "I am Jīvātmā." And after long evolution, it understands: "I want to go home. What is my home? To know who I am." So it does so through many lives, both through good and bad experiences. Every experience, remember, is a lesson taught, and a deep Saṃskāra is produced. That is why God created everything — good and evil — not for fun, but for its own evolution.

'''Second:''' So what is this Brahma Jñāna? First Brahman knows, then forgets. First Brahman knows "I am Brahman," then it forgets and says "I am non-Brahman, Anātmā. I am the individual. I am a ''prāṇī'', I am a living creature," etc. But after many lives of experience, slowly it turns its attention inward, and then practises Karma Yoga and Upāsanā Yoga. And through them both, it removes the Avidyā. By the removal of Avidyā, automatically Vidyā manifests. Like, when light is brought, the snake we are experiencing instantaneously — the arrival of the light and the disappearance of the snake both take place simultaneously. Then we see: "It is a harmless piece of rope." And in the same way, it was a rope, it is a rope, it will be a rope — but I can mistake it for a snake and suffer from the consequences of it.

'''Third:''' So Brahman — that is, each one of us — we think we are not Brahman. We think, when we believe also in God, that Brahman is sitting somewhere in Vaikuṇṭha, in Kailāsa, in Devī Loka, in Paradise, etc. But no — it is only our thoughts. Clearly speaking, "I am Brahman. Where are you? In Brahman's loka, not Brahma Loka, but Brahman's loka." So what is the essence of this 9th and 10th verse? ''Brahma Eva'' — Brahman alone, because of ignorance, thinks "I am not Brahman" — that is called Saṃsāra, that is called transmigration. ''Brahma Eva'' — and the same Brahman, now called Jīvātmā, through the acquisition of right knowledge, by the destruction of wrong knowledge, ''mucyate'' — that means it is freed from Avidyā. Avidyā is called bondage.

'''Fourth:''' Then, what is this definition of self-knowledge? ''Anātma Adhyāropa Nivṛtti — Brahma Eva Ātma Jñānam.'' What is this self-knowledge? It is the complete destruction of superimposition on the Ātman — that it is not the Ātman. The knowledge "it is not the rope, it is a snake" — that is called Adhyāropa. What does the light do? Apavāda — it removes that notion. As soon as light comes, the snake — or what we are thinking is a snake — that wrong notion disappears, and with that wrong notion, the fear and the distress also disappear.
----

== A Warning Against Dualistic Ignorance ==

Then, fifth — a warning against dualistic ignorance: ''Atha yo'nyāṃ devatām upāste, na sa veda, yathā paśur evam sa devānām'' — that is to say, he who thinks "God is different from me, Gods are different from me, somebody is different from me" — ''na sa veda'' — he is an ignorant person. That knowing itself is called ignorance. And what is the result? ''Yathā paśur evam sa devānām'' — he becomes like an animal, to be used for the purpose of the master.

So every Devā — Gods and Goddesses — if we go on worshipping with the knowledge "I am different, they are different, I am a servant and they are my masters, I am helpless and they have the power to help, I am an ignorant person and they know everything, my powers are less and they can do anything they like" — as long as this notion persists, then we are like ''paśus.'' Just like a cow is dependent upon the master, a dog is dependent upon the master, a horse is dependent upon the master — so we become dependent upon Gods.

But this word "Gods" should be interpreted broadly. If I am depending for my sustenance upon my job, I am a slave to my job, because I am not doing it happily, joyfully, with my own mind — I am doing it because I am helpless. "I want to earn money." So I become a ''Paśu'', a servant, an animal, a dependent, to the master — the office manager, the CEO, whatever it is. Anything upon which we depend.

So when we are enjoying a sweet: "Unless I have this sweet, I can't be happy. Only this sweet can give me happiness." That means I have become like an animal to that sweet — who is the mistress, a sweet — and I am a slave, a servant. So, so long as we think there is a difference between me and the Gods, or the God that I worship, until that time we depend. But the moment I come to know "I am Brahman, I am the Ātman," then that dependence will automatically disappear. Dependence means fear. Like light destroys the fear of the snake, so true knowledge destroys this slavery.
----

== The Final Realisation: ''Ahaṃ Brahmāsmi'' ==
And finally, this person realises: "I am Manu, I am the Sun, I am the Moon." These are small examples, but what it means is: everything in this universe — that is me, the entire creation — that is me. Just as we realise, upon waking up, that I created my own world in the dream state and I played with myself — everything in the dream is my own self, nobody else is there — but this knowledge comes only when we wake up.

Same knowledge — "I am not the body, I am not the mind, I am not the waking state, dream state, or dreamless state" — comes only when I wake up from this state of ignorance.

So all these statements that we are going to read in the mantras show the spiritual movement intended by the text: from ''Deha Abhimāna'' — that is to say, identity with the body, "I am the body," what Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa used to call ''Ahaṃkāra'' and ''Mamakāra'', ''āmi, āmār'' — must be replaced by ''tumi, tomār, naham, naham, tuhu, tuhu.'' So from ''Deha Abhimāna'' to ''Ātma Abhimāna'' — that is, "I am the Ātman." From ''Jīvātma Bhāva'' to ''Brahma Bhāva'' — "I am Brahman." From ''Bheda Dṛṣṭi'' — seeing everything as separate from me — to ''Sarvātma Dṛṣṭi'' — "I am everything, ''Aham sarvam abhavam.''" So from dependence to freedom.
----

== The Seeker Need Not Become Brahman — He Already Is ==
Just let us remember, when we are studying: the seeker, in fact, need not travel to Brahman, produce Brahman, or become Brahman newly. No. He merely discovers, through the removal of ignorance, that he has never been anything other than Brahman. So this is the very heart of this teaching.

And this we will have to elaborate a little bit more as part of this introduction to the very heart of this 9th and 10th mantra. And if we can understand this, then we have understood the very essence of every Upaniṣad — not only the Bṛhadāraṇyaka, but every Upaniṣad — whether the Upaniṣad speaks the word ''Tat tvam asi'', or ''Prajñānam Brahma'' — consciousness is Brahman — or "I am Ātmā Brahman" — that this "I am so and so" is none other than Brahman — or ''Ahaṃ Brahmāsmi'' — I am Brahman.

These are called Mahāvākyas. And this is a famous Mahāvākya. And so, until we reach that knowledge which will never again be covered up — ''Ahaṃ Brahmāsmi'' — thereafter, he becomes completely free. That means he will be outside the bondage. He will be swimming in the ocean of bliss, in the words of Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa.
----

== Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa at Jairāmbāṭi: An Illustration of Bhāva Samādhi ==
Once Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa, after his marriage, went to Jairāmbāṭī. He used to experience frequent bouts of what is called Bhāva Samādhi. We have to distinguish between Bhāva Samādhi and real Samādhi — Nirvikalpa Samādhi is different. Most of this is Bhāva Samādhi.

What is Bhāva Samādhi? For example, if Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa is singing, or hearing a bhajan — "My Divine Śyāmā, Māki, āmār kālo re, kālo rūpe Digambarī — so is my mother, black or blue, she is the infinite Divine Mother" — the moment he hears it, he is absorbed in that idea, he becomes one with that Śyāmā Mā. So this is called Bhāva Samādhi. So in that Bhāva Samādhi, sometimes he used to see also people who were about to come and meet him, and it used to turn out to be like that.

So, from ''Bheda Dṛṣṭi'' to ''Abheda Dṛṣṭi'', ''Sarvātma Dṛṣṭi'' — from dependence to complete freedom.

So Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa went to Jairāmbāṭī, and he had this Bhāva Samādhi. And that Bhāva Samādhi created a tremendous amount of hunger. And this happened after he had just finished his night dinner. So everybody went to bed — and then, because in villages there is no entertainment, no TV to keep a person awake, so they eat early and they also get up early and they will have a lot of work to do; no instruments are there.

So suddenly Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa came out of the Bhāva Samādhi and he started: "I am very hungry, give me something, I am really starving." Everybody got up hastily, and of course it is Mother-in law's house, where the son-in-law is valued so much. Then they were surprised, because they also know Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa's stomach is very delicate. So he said, "Just now you have eaten stomach-full!" Immediately Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa said, "When did you eat? I am just coming from Dakṣiṇeśvar." Then they understood — Mother Kālī, the Bhāva of Kālī, had possessed him.

So they had no option but, hastily, they prepared what we call ''halwā'' — a sweet — that is the nearest thing they could prepare. And immediately it was a big quantity — probably quite a huge quantity of food — and they placed it before him, thinking that he will only take a small bit of it. But to their great disappointment, he ate the whole lot. And they were terribly worried, because they knew about the condition of his stomach — he will have stomach problems.

But next morning, absolutely nothing. Everything was totally digested. How come? Because Bhāva can cause terrible loss of energy, therefore terrible hunger, therefore terrible power of digestion. Until the last, Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa enjoyed relatively very good health. He could eat and he could digest also. Only later on, because of his Bhāvas and his touching the devotees, he lost some of his health benefits.
----

== Conclusion ==
So the ultimate thing we will have to understand is ''Ahaṃ Brahmāsmi'' — how this is going to progress, we will talk about in our next class.
----

== Closing Prayer ==
''ॐ'' जननीं शारदां देवीं रामकृष्णं जगद्गुरुम् ।

पादपद्मे तयोः श्रित्वा प्रणमामि मुहुर्मुहुः ॥

''Om Jananīṁ Śāradāṃ Devīṃ Rāmakṛṣṇaṃ Jagadgurum''

''Pada Padme Tayo Śṛtvā Praṇamāmi Muhur Muhuh''

May Sri Ramakrishna, Holy Mother, and Swami Vivekananda bless us all with bhakti.

'''Jai Ramakrishna!'''
[[Category:Brihadaranyaka Upanishad]]

Brihadaranyaka Upanishad Ch.1.4 Lecture 26 on 19 April 2026

2026-06-29T00:27:16Z

Gopi:

Full Transcript (Not Corrected)

== Opening Invocation ==
ॐ जननीम् शरदाम् देविम् रामक्रिष्णम् जगत् गुर्म्

पादपद्मे तयोः स्रित्वाः प्रणमामि मुहुरुमु

Oṁ jananīṁ śaraḍhāṁ deveṁ rāmakriṣṇam jagad-gurum

pādapadmetayosritvā pranamāmi-muhurumuhu

ॐ पूर्णमदः पूर्णमिदं पूर्णात्पूर्णमुदच्यते ।

पूर्णस्य पूर्णमादाय पूर्णमेवावशिष्यते ॥

ॐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः ॥

'''OM PŪRṆAMADAḤ PŪRṆAMIDAM PŪRṆĀT PŪRṆAMUDACYATE'''

'''PŪRṆASYA PŪRṆAMĀDĀYA PŪRṆAMEVA VAŚIṢYATE'''

'''OM ŚĀNTI ŚĀNTI ŚĀNTI'''

'''OM'''

That Brahman is infinite, and this universe is also infinite. The infinite proceeds from the infinite. Taking the infinitude of the infinite universe, it remains as the infinite Brahman alone.

OM Peace, Peace, Peace be unto all.

== Recap: The Psychology of Love and the Ātman ==
In our last class, we discussed and completed the psychology of love. What is true love?

''Tad etat preyaḥ putrāt, preyo vittāt, preyo'nyasmāt sarvasmāt, tad antarataraṃ yad ayam Ātmā'' — the self is dearer than a son, dearer than wealth, dearer than everything else, because it is the innermost. We also have to add: the self is dearer than the body, than the mind.

How come? Because if the body stops giving happiness and starts giving unhappiness, then we earnestly pray to God: "Let this body be dropped away." Similarly, when the mind is highly disturbed, creating only the feeling of suffering, we want to overcome it — either by drinking, or by diverting our attention. If nothing works, then by going to the deep sleep state. So long as we are in that deep sleep state, nothing in this universe can really trouble us. We are not even aware.

And this statement — that in deep sleep there is no body consciousness, there is no awareness of the mind — clearly indicates that what we call happiness, unhappiness, and both of them together; good and evil; birth and death — everything belongs to the mind in the form of thoughts, and has nothing to do with Ātman. And without any object, we experience the highest bliss. That bliss is beyond both happiness and unhappiness.
----

== The Difference Between Bliss and Happiness ==
Many times we commit the terrible mistake of identifying this bliss with continuous happiness. These concepts are completely different — opposite to each other. Happiness always comes with unhappiness. It is sandwiched happiness. Joy, pleasure, is sandwiched between not having happiness before, and not having happiness or pleasure later on. Therefore, it is called Anātmā.

And as we discussed, Anātmā can never be dear to everybody. We want unbroken happiness, which is called peace, Śānti. And that is what we experience in deep sleep.
----

== The Meaning of ''Ahaṃ Brahmasmi'' ==
Then the mantra goes on telling that if a person understands "I am the very embodiment of bliss, because I am the Ātman" — because the Ātman is — sometimes these English words like "the Ātman" do not make much meaning unless we come to the definition, add the definition. Simply saying "I am Ātman" is meaningless. "I am Brahman" is meaningless. What should we say then? "I am Sacidānanda Ātmā. I am Satyam Jñānam Anantam Brahma." Then it makes meaning.

"I am Sat — I have no death. I am Cit — I have no ignorance. And I am Ānanda Svarūpa." What type of Ānanda? ''Anantam'' — infinite happiness, infinite bliss. Therefore, these words only we have to keep in mind.
----

== The Realised Soul and the Perishing of Anātmā ==
So if there is a person — what we call, in popular language, a realised soul, like Rāmakṛṣṇa, Swami Vivekānanda, etc. — then if these people give the teaching to other people whose happiness lies in Anātmā, obtaining Anātmā, experiencing Anātmā, enjoying or suffering from Anātmā — "that whatever you love is going to perish" — then is a Brahma Jñānī going to tell these words to other people? No.

What it means is: "My children, everything in this world is temporary." That word "temporary" means it was not before, it will not be later on — only momentarily it is there. That conveys the same idea: that if a great realised soul has to tell his students, "What you hold as dear will perish" — whether he says it or whether he doesn't say it, Anātmā is going to perish.

In fact, it is not going to perish at some future time. If you analyse deeply, after some time — because we have got these superficial understandings — there is birth, there is sustenance. For example, here is a person. He is born 99 years back. So he was born and he is continuing to live, and at the 100th year or so, he is going to die. Imagine like that.

It is a wrong concept that for 99 years or 100 years, this person is continuously in the same state. Every millisecond, our bodies are changing. Minds are changing. Change is another name for death. We have to be using this terminology with clear understanding: "I am dying. My body is dying. My mind is dying. Therefore, I — who associate with the body-mind — am also dying." If I go on being aware of these facts, then definitely there would be progress in spiritual life.
----

== Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa on Weeping for God ==
That is what Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa, in so many words, conveys: that people shed potfuls of tears at the death or separation or enmity of what they hold dear — wife, husband, children, friends, etc. But who is going to weep for God?

This is the translation by Swāmī of Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa's words — that the scripture and a realised soul are one and the same. If the scripture were to tell us that what you hold dear will perish — or, even better language: is perishing every second — that would be the correct translation. Then it is not that the person is telling. If he doesn't tell, there is no perishing; if he tells, then only perishing starts — no. He is only stating a statement of fact: "This is what is happening. Be aware of it." That is what it meant.

So you will be weeping. Why? Because the truth is, Anātmā actually doesn't exist. But because you think it exists, nonexistence will be nonexistence only — whether you think it is existent or nonexistent.
----

== ''Ātmānam Eva Priyam Upāsīta'': Meditate Upon the Self Alone as Dear ==
Therefore, what is the conclusion? ''Ātmānam eva priyam iti upāsīta'' — one should meditate upon the self alone as dear.

"As dear" means what? Like Jaḍa Bharata, who became the dear by loving the dear — he loved that perishable object, and in the next birth he himself was imbued with that saṃskāra. And he realised: "What for did I come and where did I end? I was thinking of God until the moment I perceived this young one lying down after its mother's death." So immediately he took it up. That tremendous power of concentration on God now turned upon this so-called helpless object.

That is why we all love babies so much — because they are whole for some time. That means, if they feel like weeping, they weep; if they feel like laughing, they laugh. There is no hypocrisy there. They become one with their feelings, whereas we learn how to hide our feelings. Rarely do we become one with our feelings.

When I mean — "I am so happy to see you get a promotion, win a lottery ticket, get married to a great person, or land a wonderful job" — genuinely, only a few family members, not every family member, may feel happy about it. Jealousies will come. But a Brahma Jñānī will be happy with the happiness of everybody. And a Brahma Jñānī will feel tremendous sympathy, as if he himself is suffering.
----

== Holy Mother's Compassion ==
Holy Mother's incident — I hope you will recollect. Once a poor old woman came to Holy Mother and started weeping inconsolably. Holy Mother did not know the reason. She asked, and the old woman said, "My young son — only son, upon whom I was hoping against hope that when I become old he will take up a job and look after me, and he would have looked after me — suddenly he died." And Holy Mother burst into equal sobbing. Both of them started sobbing.

What happened? Holy Mother felt: "This is my son who has really died." So every Brahma Jñānī, as we discussed earlier, identifies everybody as one's own, as my own self. There is no pretence about it, there is no artificiality in it. So we have to understand. But how does he love? Not as Anātmā, but as Ātmā. And Ātmā is only one. Therefore, there is no difference.

"Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thine own self" — this is what Bhagavān Jesus Christ is trying to tell.
----

== The Result of Meditating on the Ātman ==
Therefore, what is the result? ''Ātmānam eva priyam upāsīta'' — one should meditate upon the self alone as dear. And what does he get by that Upāsanā? ''Ātmānam eva priyam upāsīta — ya Ātmānam eva priyam upāste, na hi asya priyaṃ pramāyukam bhavati'' — he who meditates upon the self alone as dear, what he holds as dear will not perish.

Because what he is holding as dear is the Ātman. And he holds it as: "You are the Ātman. I am contemplating upon you." No — "I am you. So there is no I and you. What is, is only one." So that is the result. What else do we want? And Ātman is of the nature of unending, unbroken, eternal, infinite bliss.
----

== We All Love Only the Ātman ==
So we all love only Ātman. Even the worldly person doesn't love any object — let us remember it. First we love happiness. And if any object is giving me happiness, I love that object as a secondary love. Primary love always belongs to happiness. And secondary love belongs to that instrument, that object, through which I can derive that happiness.

And that is why one's own happiness, one's own nature, is the nearest and dearest. Ātman is the nearest to all of us, because all of us are Ātman. That is not a proper language — there is no "all." But we have to use it, because at this moment we are living in a world where I think I am one among this infinite number of objects. Therefore, there is no "all." Everything is only one Ātman.

Like a thousand reflections in a mirror — if one person stands before a thousand mirrors, there will be as many reflections as the number of mirrors. But depending upon the quality of the mirror — some may be convex, some may be concave, whatever it is — and some may be very clean, some may be covered with a small amount of dust, and some may be covered with full dust — so the reflections will vary only depending upon the quality of the mirrors. And our minds are like mirrors. That is what Patañjali in his Yogaśāstra says: ''citta vṛtti nirodha'' — make the mind pure. Pure means there should be no other thought other than that. Then what happens? Thereafter we dwell upon it without any break.

How so? Because what we are looking for from birth to death is not an object but happiness. And here is infinite bliss. Therefore, the Yogī doesn't want to have any interruption: "I am of the nature of happiness. That is what I am — the Ātman." And Ātman also is the dearest because it is the nearest to every one of us. Here, "nearest" means not something which is near in terms of time, distance, space, or objective distance. That is: "I am the Ātman and Ātman I am" — in that sense only. And therefore, ''Aham Sacidānanda Svarūpaḥ.'' That is what we have to understand. Everything other than the Ātman perishes.
----

== Structure of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad ==
This is the essence of Mantra 8, in the fourth section of the first chapter of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. Now the next two mantras — the 9th and 10th — are the very essence of this Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad.

We said at the beginning, in the introduction, that the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad is divided into six chapters. And every two chapters — 1st and 2nd, 3rd and 4th, 5th and 6th — are given particular names.

The first two chapters go by the name of Upadeśa Kāṇḍa, or Madhu Kāṇḍa. Why is it called Madhu? Madhu means honey. Honey means what? Everything is Brahman. "I am, I love Ātman. And what is everything? Everything is also nothing but Ātman. Since I love the Ātman, therefore everything is Ātman. Therefore I love everything as my one single infinite self." That is why everybody becomes dear. For a Brahma Jñānī, there are neither friends nor enemies, neither nearer nor distant people. There is only one reality: ''Brahma Eva Asti'' — there is nothing but Brahman. That is what is said in the 6th chapter of the Chāndogya Upaniṣad also: ''Sadeva Saumya idam agre āsīt'' — Sat, pure existence, pure knowledge, pure bliss, Sacidānanda.

Which the 2nd chapter of the Taittirīya Upaniṣad, Brahmanandavalī, defines, changing one word: ''Satyam, Jñānam, Anantam.'' The word ''Satyam'' corresponds to Sat. The word ''Jñānam'' corresponds to Cit. And the word ''Anantam'' corresponds to Ānanda — unbroken, unlimited, which means infinite. And here he has used the word ''Anantam'' in the Brahmanandavalī.
----

== The Progressive Ānanda of the Kośas ==
So there would be a desire. After going through the ritualistic portions, etc., and slowly as the mind becomes purer, first a person develops and progresses: "I want happiness in this world." Second, he progresses further: "I want higher happiness, obtainable in the higher lokas." We can also equate that the Ānanda which one gets in the Prāṇamaya Kośa is much subtler, more pervading, and more happiness.

Because remember: the Ānandamaya Kośa, only when it becomes a little bit covered up, is called Vijñānamaya. A little more covered up — or grossened, becoming gross, meaning covered up more and more — it becomes Manomaya. And it becomes more covered up, which is called Prāṇamaya.

So I can put it this way: one obtains some amount of happiness in Annamaya Kośa, one obtains more happiness in Prāṇamaya Kośa, higher than that in Manomaya Kośa, higher than that in Vijñānamaya Kośa, and higher than that in Ānandamaya Kośa. And finally — all these are, remember, finite. Finite because: "I enjoy this object called Annamaya. Similarly Prāṇamaya, similarly Manomaya, Vijñānamaya, and similarly Ānandamaya." When I am still making all these Pañcakośas — considering them, classifying them — as Anātmā, what does Anātmā mean? Different from me, because of ignorance. But all these are manifestations of that one single Ātmā.

''Ānandaṃ'' — it is Ānandaṃ, and Ānandamaya Kośa is both Ātman and Anātman. That is how we have to say it. However great the Ānanda we derive from the Ānandamaya Kośa, it is still finite only. So just try to imagine, if you can — you try to compare the great happiness, finite happiness, with the infinite. There is no comparison at all. So therefore this one has to realise. That is why it is called Upadeśa Kāṇḍa.
----

== The Three Kāṇḍas ==
So the first two chapters — 1st and 2nd — are called Upadeśa Kāṇḍa. And the 3rd and 4th are called Muni Kāṇḍa, Yājñavalkya Kāṇḍa, because Yājñavalkya plays the central role of the Paramāguru who teaches to various people — especially to two people: one, his own wife Maitreyī, and second, the greatest of all these kings, Janaka Mahārāja. And then the last two chapters are called Khila Kāṇḍa — an assortment of Upāsanās, and helpful Upāsanās, where how we can obtain or sacralise — make everything sacred — by doing certain types of rituals combined with certain types of contemplations.

So why am I giving this long introduction? Because these mantras — the 9th and 10th in this fourth section of the first chapter of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka — are the very essence. And here only we get that famous, most popular Mahāvākya: ''Ahaṃ Brahmāsmi.'' And this is confirmed.

As I said, please keep in mind always: the first and second chapters form the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad as if the very essence of all the scriptures — ''Brahma Satyam, Jagat Mithyā.'' And that ''Brahma Satyam'' is expressed here as ''Ahaṃ Brahmāsmi.'' It comes in the tenth mantra, the next mantra.
----

== Mantra 9: The Seekers' Question ==
But the ninth mantra is a question raised by certain seekers of Ātma Vidyā or Brahma Jñānam. The answer is given in the tenth. And it continues until the second chapter, third section, sixth mantra, where it says: "What is the way?" So here, the Mahāvākya — "You are Brahman" — all right, I believe in it. But how do I know that I am Brahman? I have to get rid of Ajñāna. How do I get rid of my ignorance?

And that is where, in the second chapter, third section, sixth mantra, comes the most famous Sādhana: ''neti neti'' — "not this, not this." Every Anātmā has to be negated. That is, in popular words: "I am not the waker. I am not the dreamer. I am not the sleeper." In the Taittirīya Upaniṣad: "I am not the Annamaya to Ānandamaya Pañcakośas." And when I deny, what remains — that is called ''Satyam.''
----

== Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa's Analogy of ''Neti Neti'' ==
Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa symbolises this through a beautiful analogy. It was midnight. A servant had to urgently find his master. So he enters into a room — a big room full of objects. But he knows the master is sleeping: "I have to find him out." Perhaps the servant has never entered this room. So there is no light also.

So the person goes on touching: "Not this." "This is not my master." So he touches a pillar, maybe a table, maybe something else. Ultimately, he touches the bed. "This is the bed." So in the bedroom, the bed is the place where the master has to be found. So he touches the master. "So, after denying everything, negating everything, what remains? This is the master."

This is what Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa wants to convey through that explanation of that word ''neti neti.'' So the servant went on saying: "Not this, not this." And after negating everything, what remains? That is called the master. Here in this analogy, the servant is the seeker and the master is none other than Brahman. This is what we have to understand.
----

== A Brief Translation of Mantras 9 and 10 ==
So very briefly, let me read out, before I give an introduction to both the 9th and 10th mantras.

''Tad āhuḥ'' — they say. Who says? There were some seekers — earnest seekers of Brahma Vidyā. They came to know from Guru Upadeśa, from their own logical reasoning, from their own worldly experience: "Everything is Anātmā. Anātmā means Anitya. Anitya means unreliable. Unreliable means everything is full of suffering, sooner or later. So therefore we want to go to, or know, that by knowing which, we will be ''Satyam Jñānam Anantam Brahma.'' I can claim: I am Brahman. ''Ahaṃ Brahmāsmi.''" That is where this question in the 9th mantra is going to lead.

So these people were discussing, and then they were telling: ''yad brahma vidyayā sarvaṃ bhaviṣyantīti manuṣyā manyante'' — "Men think: through the knowledge of Brahman, we shall become all." So these people said: "We all heard about Brahma Vidyā, especially from the scriptures, and our teachers also say the same thing. What is that? There are ''manuṣyāḥ'' — people. What people? Not ordinary people, but people who have realised Brahman — their declaration, like Vāmadeva: ''so aham sarvaṃ abhavam'' — 'I have become everything.'"

So: ''brahma vidyayā sarvaṃ bhaviṣyantīti'' — by obtaining the knowledge of Brahman, we become everything. Because besides Brahman, there is nothing else. ''Satyam Jñānam Anantam Brahma.'' So people are convinced. They are teaching the same thing. Here, "men think" — not ordinary men, but seekers, earnest sincere seekers like Naciketa — think that if we can get the knowledge of Brahman, through the knowledge of Brahman, we shall become all. That means what? "We will have no death. We will have no ignorance. And our bliss will be unbroken."

''Kim u tat brahma avet?'' — "Now that Brahma, what did it know? I am all. So by what knowledge? What did that Brahman know? That it became everything." Well then, what did that Brahman know, through which it became all?

''Asmāt tat sarvam abhavat iti'' — "Because of which it became all." That means: ''Ekam, Sat, Satyam Jñānam Anantam.'' So it became — rather it understood: "I am ''Satyam'', deathless. I am ''Jñānam'', ignorance-less. I am ''Anantam'' — infinite, unbroken bliss." How did Brahman come to know about it? Because if Brahman came to know about it, then if we follow what Brahman did to become all, then we also will come to know about it.

As I said, beautiful explanations will come later on. So, with this, the answer is given in the 10th mantra.
----

== Summary of the 10th Mantra: ''Ahaṃ Brahmāsmi'' ==
And then, what is the summary of this 10th mantra? So here also, there are beautiful Sanskrit mantras, which we will very briefly, and only selected, we will study now, just to get a glimpse.

You know, it is like a famous speaker is going to speak. Every famous speaker or writer is famous because they are great. And how did they become great? Because the greater a person, the clearer he will be — either while speaking or writing. There would be no ambiguity. Study Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa, study Swami Vivekānanda, and study some of the scholars — you will understand what difference there is. Rāmakṛṣṇa can explain the most profound truths with the simplest analogies.

So the essence of these answers given here: what is it? First, so, you have to become Brahma. What does it mean? ''Ahaṃ Brahmāsmi'' — I am Brahman. What does it mean? Not that you are not Brahman now, or in the past — and you are going to become Brahman in the future by some peculiar process, or action, Karma, or Upāsanā. No. Simply: you are, you were, you will be Brahman. But due to Ajñāna, Avidyā, you are thinking: "I am not Brahman."

That "I am not Brahman" is expressed as: "I am a man. I am a woman. I am a dog" — because even dogs are highly conscious that they are dogs, they are completely identified. A mosquito is completely identified: "I am a mosquito." How do you know? You interact with it, and it will let you know.
----

== The Preface of the Upaniṣad's Teaching ==
So, what is the conclusion? We are summarising both the 9th and 10th mantras as an introduction. I was talking about famous speakers or writers. What do they do? Every writer has a preface where, in crystal clear terms: "This is the subject I am going to discuss. These are the important points, and I am going to elaborate them and present before you what is called the explanations, and at the end again I will give you the conclusions." So by reading that preface, we can understand. The same thing is followed by speakers: "I am going to speak to you about these things."

This is how, here, we have to summarise. That is why I am giving the summary. And this summary is according to Advaita Vedāntic interpretation — please keep that in mind. Because the same Upaniṣads are also commented upon by Madhvācārya, Rāmānujācārya, and especially Rāmānujācārya's famous commentary on the Brahma Sūtras called ''Śrī Bhāṣyam'' — a beautiful name. But they don't accept Nirguṇa, Nirviśeṣa, Nirākāra Brahman. But Advaita alone accepts: Brahman alone is the only truth, and you cannot describe it.
----

== The Four-Part Summary of the Teaching ==
So therefore, what is the essence of it? What does it mean?

'''First:''' Brahman alone, for some mysterious reason, is caught in the net of Avidyā or ignorance, and it enters into this Anātmā, this ''jagat'', creation. Creation is called Anātmā. This world is called Anātmā. Anything that doesn't remind us of God — that is called Anātmā. Anything that makes a difference — "I am different from you" — that is called Anātmā. So that Brahman forgot its Brahmanhood, and through ignorance, it is thinking: "I am Jīvātmā." And after long evolution, it understands: "I want to go home. What is my home? To know who I am." So it does so through many lives, both through good and bad experiences. Every experience, remember, is a lesson taught, and a deep Saṃskāra is produced. That is why God created everything — good and evil — not for fun, but for its own evolution.

'''Second:''' So what is this Brahma Jñāna? First Brahman knows, then forgets. First Brahman knows "I am Brahman," then it forgets and says "I am non-Brahman, Anātmā. I am the individual. I am a ''prāṇī'', I am a living creature," etc. But after many lives of experience, slowly it turns its attention inward, and then practises Karma Yoga and Upāsanā Yoga. And through them both, it removes the Avidyā. By the removal of Avidyā, automatically Vidyā manifests. Like, when light is brought, the snake we are experiencing instantaneously — the arrival of the light and the disappearance of the snake both take place simultaneously. Then we see: "It is a harmless piece of rope." And in the same way, it was a rope, it is a rope, it will be a rope — but I can mistake it for a snake and suffer from the consequences of it.

'''Third:''' So Brahman — that is, each one of us — we think we are not Brahman. We think, when we believe also in God, that Brahman is sitting somewhere in Vaikuṇṭha, in Kailāsa, in Devī Loka, in Paradise, etc. But no — it is only our thoughts. Clearly speaking, "I am Brahman. Where are you? In Brahman's loka, not Brahma Loka, but Brahman's loka." So what is the essence of this 9th and 10th verse? ''Brahma Eva'' — Brahman alone, because of ignorance, thinks "I am not Brahman" — that is called Saṃsāra, that is called transmigration. ''Brahma Eva'' — and the same Brahman, now called Jīvātmā, through the acquisition of right knowledge, by the destruction of wrong knowledge, ''mucyate'' — that means it is freed from Avidyā. Avidyā is called bondage.

'''Fourth:''' Then, what is this definition of self-knowledge? ''Anātma Adhyāropa Nivṛtti — Brahma Eva Ātma Jñānam.'' What is this self-knowledge? It is the complete destruction of superimposition on the Ātman — that it is not the Ātman. The knowledge "it is not the rope, it is a snake" — that is called Adhyāropa. What does the light do? Apavāda — it removes that notion. As soon as light comes, the snake — or what we are thinking is a snake — that wrong notion disappears, and with that wrong notion, the fear and the distress also disappear.
----

== A Warning Against Dualistic Ignorance ==
Then, fifth — a warning against dualistic ignorance: ''Atha yo'nyāṃ devatām upāste, na sa veda, yathā paśur evam sa devānām'' — that is to say, he who thinks "God is different from me, Gods are different from me, somebody is different from me" — ''na sa veda'' — he is an ignorant person. That knowing itself is called ignorance. And what is the result? ''Yathā paśur evam sa devānām'' — he becomes like an animal, to be used for the purpose of the master.

So every Devā — Gods and Goddesses — if we go on worshipping with the knowledge "I am different, they are different, I am a servant and they are my masters, I am helpless and they have the power to help, I am an ignorant person and they know everything, my powers are less and they can do anything they like" — as long as this notion persists, then we are like ''paśus.'' Just like a cow is dependent upon the master, a dog is dependent upon the master, a horse is dependent upon the master — so we become dependent upon Gods.

But this word "Gods" should be interpreted broadly. If I am depending for my sustenance upon my job, I am a slave to my job, because I am not doing it happily, joyfully, with my own mind — I am doing it because I am helpless. "I want to earn money." So I become a ''Paśu'', a servant, an animal, a dependent, to the master — the office manager, the CEO, whatever it is. Anything upon which we depend.

So when we are enjoying a sweet: "Unless I have this sweet, I can't be happy. Only this sweet can give me happiness." That means I have become like an animal to that sweet — who is the mistress, a sweet — and I am a slave, a servant. So, so long as we think there is a difference between me and the Gods, or the God that I worship, until that time we depend. But the moment I come to know "I am Brahman, I am the Ātman," then that dependence will automatically disappear. Dependence means fear. Like light destroys the fear of the snake, so true knowledge destroys this slavery.
----

== The Final Realisation: ''Ahaṃ Brahmāsmi'' ==
And finally, this person realises: "I am Manu, I am the Sun, I am the Moon." These are small examples, but what it means is: everything in this universe — that is me, the entire creation — that is me. Just as we realise, upon waking up, that I created my own world in the dream state and I played with myself — everything in the dream is my own self, nobody else is there — but this knowledge comes only when we wake up.

Same knowledge — "I am not the body, I am not the mind, I am not the waking state, dream state, or dreamless state" — comes only when I wake up from this state of ignorance.

So all these statements that we are going to read in the mantras show the spiritual movement intended by the text: from ''Deha Vimāna'' — that is to say, identity with the body, "I am the body," what Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa used to call ''Ahaṃkāra'' and ''Mamakāra'', ''āmi, āmār'' — must be replaced by ''tumi, tomār, naham, naham, tuhu, tuhu.'' So from ''Deha Vimāna'' to ''Ātma Vimāna'' — that is, "I am the Ātman." From ''Jīvātma Bhāva'' to ''Brahma Bhāva'' — "I am Brahman." From ''Bheda Dṛṣṭi'' — seeing everything as separate from me — to ''Sarvātma Dṛṣṭi'' — "I am everything, ''Aham sarvam abhavam.''" So from dependence to freedom.
----

== The Seeker Need Not Become Brahman — He Already Is ==
Just let us remember, when we are studying: the seeker, in fact, need not travel to Brahman, produce Brahman, or become Brahman newly. No. He merely discovers, through the removal of ignorance, that he has never been anything other than Brahman. So this is the very heart of this teaching.

And this we will have to elaborate a little bit more as part of this introduction to the very heart of this 9th and 10th mantra. And if we can understand this, then we have understood the very essence of every Upaniṣad — not only the Bṛhadāraṇyaka, but every Upaniṣad — whether the Upaniṣad speaks the word ''Tat tvam asi'', or ''Prajñānam Brahma'' — consciousness is Brahman — or "I am Ātmā Brahman" — that this "I am so and so" is none other than Brahman — or ''Ahaṃ Brahmāsmi'' — I am Brahman.

These are called Mahāvākyas. And this is a famous Mahāvākya. And so, until we reach that knowledge which will never again be covered up — ''Ahaṃ Brahmāsmi'' — thereafter, he becomes completely free. That means he will be outside the bondage. He will be swimming in the ocean of bliss, in the words of Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa.
----

== Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa at Jairāmbāṭi: An Illustration of Bhāva Samādhi ==
Once Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa, after his marriage, went to Jairāmbāṭī. He used to experience frequent bouts of what is called Bhāva Samādhi. We have to distinguish between Bhāva Samādhi and real Samādhi — Nirvikalpa Samādhi is different. Most of this is Bhāva Samādhi.

What is Bhāva Samādhi? For example, if Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa is singing, or hearing a bhajan — "My Divine Śyāmā, Māki, āmār kālo re, kālo rūpe Digambarī — so is my mother, black or blue, she is the infinite Divine Mother" — the moment he hears it, he is absorbed in that idea, he becomes one with that Śyāmā Mā. So this is called Bhāva Samādhi. So in that Bhāva Samādhi, sometimes he used to see also people who were about to come and meet him, and it used to turn out to be like that.

So, from ''Bheda Dṛṣṭi'' to ''Abheda Dṛṣṭi'', ''Sarvātma Dṛṣṭi'' — from dependence to complete freedom.

So Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa went to Jairāmbāṭī, and he had this Bhāva Samādhi. And that Bhāva Samādhi created a tremendous amount of hunger. And this happened after he had just finished his night dinner. So everybody went to bed — and then, because in villages there is no entertainment, no TV to keep a person awake, so they eat early and they also get up early and they will have a lot of work to do; no instruments are there.

So suddenly Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa came out of the Bhāva Samādhi and he started: "I am very hungry, give me something, I am really starving." Everybody got up hastily, and of course it is Mother Illā's house, where the son-in-law is valued so much. Then they were surprised, because they also know Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa's stomach is very delicate. So he said, "Just now you have eaten stomach-full!" Immediately Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa said, "When did you eat? I am just coming from Dakṣiṇeśvar." Then they understood — Mother Kālī, the Bhāva of Kālī, had possessed him.

So they had no option but, hastily, they prepared what we call ''halwā'' — a sweet — that is the nearest thing they could prepare. And immediately it was a big quantity — probably quite a huge quantity of food — and they placed it before him, thinking that he will only take a small bit of it. But to their great disappointment, he ate the whole lot. And they were terribly worried, because they knew about the condition of his stomach — he will have stomach problems.

But next morning, absolutely nothing. Everything was totally digested. How come? Because Bhāva can cause terrible loss of energy, therefore terrible hunger, therefore terrible power of digestion. Until the last, Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa enjoyed relatively very good health. He could eat and he could digest also. Only later on, because of his Bhāvas and his touching the devotees, he lost some of his health benefits.
----

== Conclusion ==
So the ultimate thing we will have to understand is ''Ahaṃ Brahmāsmi'' — how this is going to progress, we will talk about in our next class.
----

== Closing Prayer ==
''ॐ'' जननीं शारदां देवीं रामकृष्णं जगद्गुरुम् ।

पादपद्मे तयोः श्रित्वा प्रणमामि मुहुर्मुहुः ॥

''Om Jananīṁ Śāradāṃ Devīṃ Rāmakṛṣṇaṃ Jagadgurum''

''Pada Padme Tayo Śṛtvā Praṇamāmi Muhur Muhuh''

May Sri Ramakrishna, Holy Mother, and Swami Vivekananda bless us all with bhakti.

'''Jai Ramakrishna!'''
[[Category:Brihadaranyaka Upanishad]]

Brihadaranyaka Upanishad Ch.1.2 Lecture 14 on 08 March 2026

2026-06-29T00:23:48Z

Gopi: Added mantras and rearranged the para

Full Transcript (Not Corrected)

= Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad – Class Notes =

== Opening Invocation ==
ॐ पूर्णमदः पूर्णमिदं पूर्णात्पूर्णमुदच्यते ।

पूर्णस्य पूर्णमादाय पूर्णमेवावशिष्यते ॥

ॐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः ॥

'''OM PŪRṆAMADAḤ PŪRṆAMIDAM PŪRṆĀT PŪRṆAMUDACYATE'''

'''PŪRṆASYA PŪRṆAMĀDĀYA PŪRṆAMEVA VAŚIṢYATE'''

'''OM ŚĀNTI ŚĀNTI ŚĀNTI'''

'''OM'''

That Brahman is infinite, and this universe is also infinite. The infinite proceeds from the infinite. Taking the infinitude of the infinite universe, it remains as the infinite Brahman alone.

OM Peace, Peace, Peace be unto all.

== Introduction: The Ghaṭabhāṣya of Śaṅkarācārya ==
In our last class, in the context of Sṛṣṭi and especially how Agni was born, there was a very interesting commentary by the great Śaṅkarācārya. It is called the Ghaṭabhāṣya.

What is the importance of this Ghaṭabhāṣya? ''Ghaṭa'' means a pot — commentary on the pot. What does it mean? It means there were some schools of philosophy, especially the Naiyāyikas (Logicians) and also some of the Pūrva Mīmāṃsakas, whose way of thinking led them to the conviction that there is neither cause nor effect before creation — that nothing was there.

What made these people make such an astonishing statement? Because the Upaniṣad itself says that in the beginning, that is, before creation, there was nothing — absolutely śūnyam, complete nothingness.
----

== The Problem: How Can Something Come from Nothing? ==
Our minds can never understand how something can come out of nothing. What is that "something"? It is this whole universe that we are experiencing in front of our eyes, of which we are also a part. Let us not forget that I am also part of the universe — my body is part of the physical universe, my mind is part of the mental universe or what we call the sūkṣma śarīra (subtle body), and when I am in the deep sleep state, there is also an instrument called the kāraṇa śarīra (causal body).

So, the sthūla śarīra, sūkṣma śarīra, and kāraṇa śarīra — all these three śarīras are limitations. The entire universe contains these things, especially manifest in living beings. This is called creation. So the Upaniṣad is making a statement that in the beginning there was absolutely nothing, but that meaning will not be acceptable — neither by the Veda, which means the Upaniṣad, neither by the Ṛṣis, nor by any person capable of even the slightest thinking.
----

== Two Views of Creation: Pariṇāmavāda and Vivartavāda ==
How do we understand this? That is where the great Śaṅkarācārya comes to our aid.

The belief of every bhakta, every devotee, is that God exists and that He created me out of Himself — because He cannot create out of anything else, for the very simple reason that there is nothing outside Him. In previous classes also I mentioned many times that there are two types of understanding about creation.

'''The first view''' is like a potter making a pot. The potter is separate, the pot is separate, and the instrument with which the pot is made is also separate. They have no mutual relationship excepting their use — and the combination of these three results in the production of the pot. But that is the view of dualistic schools of philosophy, not of Advaita.

'''The second view''' — which Advaita Vedānta presents — is called ''Vivartavāda'': something appears as something else, but nothing has actually changed. The most classical example is that a harmless rope appears to be a fearful serpent. Advaita Vedānta always takes this second view — that Brahman "created" means He Himself has become manifest. For this simple reason: He is infinite, and we cannot imagine anything besides infinity. Therefore, unlike the potter, if Brahman were the potter, where would the clay be? Where would the potter's wheel be? They do not exist. Therefore He must be all three. That is the understanding.
----

== The Nature of Effect: Clay, Gold, and the Pot ==
From this understanding, two conclusions follow.

The first conclusion is this — it is just like clay manifesting as a pot. What is a pot? It is not a second object separate from clay. It is nothing but clay. If you remove the clay from a pot, nothing exists. Clay in one particular form is called clay. The same clay in another particular form is called a pot.

Similarly, the same gold in one form is formless gold. But when it is given a particular shape to fit a particular purpose — it could be a necklace, a bangle, a nose ring, an ear ring, or a finger ring — it is given a special form and a special name for that very special purpose. But these are all just name, form, and utility. If you melt away the gold from any of these ornaments, only gold remains — without form, without name, without specific purpose.
----

== Misinterpretations and Swami Vivekananda's Teaching ==
There are people who think they are clever and who claim there is nothing, and that the whole universe has come out of nothing. These are mystical words used even in the Bible. The Bible also contains the statement that God created this universe out of nothing — by which we must understand that He Himself has become this entire universe.

This is the very root of Swami Vivekananda's saying: ''"Śiva jñāne jīva sevā"'' — whenever you see any suffering individual, he is none other than Śiva. Because in this particular manifestation, he may not have clothes, food, or possessions, or he may be suffering physical or mental problems — but remove these names, "problem," "physical," "mental," and he is nothing but pure Śiva. Then the same thing applies to the person who is serving also. The person who is serving is Śiva, the person who is being served is Śiva, and the instruments with which this person serves are also nothing but Śiva.

That is the philosophy behind these statements, and that is exactly what this second Brāhmaṇa of the first chapter of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad wants to say.
----

== Why Śaṅkarācārya Wrote the Ghaṭabhāṣya ==
A brilliant commentary is given by Śaṅkarācārya. Because he uses the word ''ghaṭa'' (pot) so many times, some commentators have specifically called this the Ghaṭabhāṣya.

Using the pot as an example, Śaṅkarācārya wants to refute some false views presented either by the Naiyāyikas or by the Pūrvamīmāṃsakas. By the way, Nyāya, Vaiśeṣika, Pūrvamīmāṃsā, and Uttaramīmāṃsā are the names of certain schools of philosophy — and the fifth one is called Vedānta. Out of Hinduism, as we know, Buddhism has also come. Buddha was a pure Hindu, educated in the Upaniṣads, and he taught only the Upaniṣads — emphasising especially the nature of Māyā. When he says ''Śūnyavāda'', the theory that everything is śūnya or nihilism, what he means is that only pure Brahman exists.
----

== Buddhism and the Kṣaṇika Vijñānavāda School ==
So Śaṅkarācārya's commentary primarily examines Buddhism to discuss whether a cause exists or not. Buddhism has four schools of thought, among which there is one called ''Kṣaṇika Vijñānavāda''. ''Vijñāna'' means knowledge, ''vāda'' means theory, ''kṣaṇika'' means momentary or temporary. This is also called the Yogācāra school of Buddhism.

What do these Kṣaṇika Vijñānavādins really want to say? According to them, there is no external world at all — no external world separate from the mind. Suppose I see a tree. According to this school, there is no tree there; there is only a thought of a tree.

Of course, this can easily be countered — if there were no tree outside, externally, then why did this particular thought corresponding to that tree arise? Why not the thought of a tiger, or anything else?

But this particular school believes that thoughts alone are there — and further, are even these thoughts real or permanent? They say no, they are all ''kṣaṇika'', momentary. So the many objects outside our body are nothing but so many thoughts in our minds.
== The Topic of the Upaniṣad: Sṛṣṭi and Its Real Purpose ==
This section is called the Agni Pramāṇa. In this second section, ''pramāṇa'' meaning section, the topic of Sṛṣṭi (creation) is given. The essence, the very purpose of this emphasis, is not to say that Sṛṣṭi is absolutely real. We have to remember what "real" means — that which never changes and will always remain for eternity is called real. That which changes is only temporary reality. A baby changes every millisecond — and if you count billions of milliseconds, he becomes a youth, a middle-aged person, an old person. Before birth he was invisible; after death he also becomes invisible. In between he remains visible. Invisibility does not mean death. ''Laya'' does not mean death.

So we have read:

नैवेह किञ्चनाग्र आसीत्, मृत्युनैवेदमावृतमासीत् अशनायया, अशनाय। हि मृत्युः तन्मनोऽकुरुत, आत्मन्वी स्यामिति । सोऽर्चन्नचरत्, तस्यार्चत आपोऽजायन्त; अर्चते वै मे कमभूदिति, तदेवार्कस्यार्कत्वम्; कं ह वा अस्मै भवति य एवमेतदर्कस्यार्कत्वं वेद ।। १ ।।

In the beginning there was nothing whatever in the universe. This universe was enveloped by Death (Hiraṇyagarbha) alone or Hunger; for hunger is death. He produced the mind (desiring), ‘May I be possessed of a mind’. He moved about worshipping himself. As he was thus worshipping himself, water was produced. (As he thought), ‘Verily, while I was worshipping, water sprang up ’this is why fire is called Arka. Surely there is water (or happiness) for him who thus knows why fire is called Arka.

Hiraṇyagarbha's creation is unlike ours — his very thought becomes solidified as an object.
----

== The Central Question of the Ghaṭabhāṣya ==
The Upaniṣad's statement that ''in the beginning there was nothing'' can create terrible confusion and misunderstanding. It might appear as though the Upaniṣad is saying there was truly nothing, and out of nothing the whole creation has come.

Now, creation means an effect, and every effect must have a creator — that is, a cause. We see this effect; the world exists. How can there be an effect that exists if there were no cause at all? So there must be some cause.

For clarifying this point, Śaṅkarācārya writes this elaborate bhāṣyam. And this Ghaṭabhāṣya's essence rests on two arguments:

# Before creation, is there a cause or not?
# Before creation, is there an effect or not?

Why so much bother? Because at the time of Śaṅkarācārya, there were certain schools of philosophy whose propagators held peculiar views. Some schools say there is no effect. Some people go even further and say there was no cause either.
----

== Cognition and Recognition: Abhijñā and Pratyabhijñā ==
We must understand something here. When I see a tree, simultaneously two things happen.

Suppose you see a tree, and suppose this is the first time you are seeing such an object. You don't know it is a tree. Then somebody comes and tells you, "Oh, this is called a tree." Now that instruction sits in your mind.

The first time you come across a tree and have an experience, that is called ''abhijñā'' — cognition. The next time you see the same tree or another tree, you recognise it — you say, "I know what this is; it is a tree." That is called ''pratyabhijñā'' — recognition. Recognition always means: I knew this before.

According to the Kṣaṇika Vijñānavāda school, everything is first of all a thought, and thoughts are ever-changing — momentary. So, for example, I see a tree just for a moment. The first thought arises, then it dies without any memory, and then the second thought appears, and I recognise: "This is a tree."
----

== Śaṅkarācārya's Refutation: The Necessity of a Continuous Witness ==
Here Śaṅkarācārya catches this argument and refutes it decisively.

The first time you have seen a tree, according to this school, that thought is completely dead — and not only the thought, but the thinker is also dead, because the body is temporary and the mind is also temporary. Now, how could you recognise — ''re-cognise'' — and say with confidence, "This is a tree"?

Their answer is that there is a ''sādṛśya'' — a similarity — between the first thought of the tree and the second thought of the tree.

Śaṅkarācārya catches them again: similarity between what and what? For there to be recognition of similarity, there must be a witness who is ''not'' changing, who remembers, "I have seen this object; I was told it was a tree," and who, the second time he sees it, tallies the present experience with the memory. Even for similarity to be recognised, there must be remembrance. If you see someone who looks very similar to someone else, you must have knowledge of both persons — you must have seen the first and be now seeing the second, and you must be the same person holding both memories simultaneously.

Let me give an example. Suppose Rāma was going along a road and Kṛṣṇa sees him — "Oh, this person is Rāma" — and then both go away. Then, later, another person called Rāmakṛṣṇa appears and another person called Bālakṛṣṇa also appears. Rāmakṛṣṇa had never had the experience of Bālakṛṣṇa, and Bālakṛṣṇa never experienced Rāmakṛṣṇa. Do they recognise each other? Can either say, "You look similar to so-and-so"? In order to say that, one must have the remembrances of both objects. Then only is similarity possible.

So the series of experience is continuous, the object is continuous, the thought of the object is continuous — and this is how Śaṅkarācārya refutes the Kṣaṇika Vijñānavādins.
----

== The Main Point: Cause Must Precede Effect ==
But what is the deeper point of all this? These schools cannot accept clay as a cause. They say there is no cause and no relationship between cause and effect.

So they say: first I see clay, then I see the pot. The thought of clay comes and goes. The thought of the pot comes and goes. There is no possibility for the cause to produce the effect. Śaṅkarācārya refutes this. We know that clay alone becomes the pot — everybody knows. Even this Buddhist knows. Clay existed before the pot, exists in the pot, and will exist after the pot is gone.

Just imagine there is a pot — an effect that has come out of clay. The pot is only a name and form. Really, clay was, clay is. Even if you destroy the pot, the clay remains as clay. What then is destroyed? The name and form of the pot are destroyed, but the original material out of which the pot is fashioned does not die — just as melting a golden ornament destroys only its name and form, not the gold.

And similarly, we can always say: "I was the baby, I was the adolescent, I was the youth, I was the middle-aged person, I was the old man — now I am the very old person." However much the body changes and the mind changes, there is an eternal witness. And that witness is Brahman. That witness — that is the purport of all these arguments.

So the ''kṣaṇika'' (momentary) argument of the Buddhist does not hold water. This counter-argument is called ''sādṛśyāt pratyabhijñā''. Śaṅkarācārya thus establishes: if you see an effect, that effect must have a cause, and that cause is eternal. This whole universe came out of Brahman.
----

== The Naiyāyika's Argument: The Dark Room and the Pot ==
Then comes another argument. A person says: "Why are you going on arguing and counter-arguing? Nothing was there before — simply take that statement as it is."

For that also Śaṅkarācārya wants to say: if there were no cause, there can be no effect. ''Nothing comes out of nothing. Something comes out of something.'' That is the main point.

Then there is a very beautiful argument. Imagine you are in a room and there is a pot in the room, but it is completely dark — you cannot see the pot. Then you put on the light. The moment the light comes on, immediately you see the pot.

Now change the example. It is not a pot but a lump of clay that is in the dark room, and you put on the light. What do you see? Not a pot — you see only clay.

This is the argument of another school of philosophy, the Naiyāyikas (Logicians). Then Śaṅkarācārya has to clarify that every effect can exist in two different forms.
----

== Manifest and Unmanifest Effects: The Example of Butter in Milk ==
For example, consider milk. Somebody asks: "Do you have butter?" You can honestly say: "Yes, I surely have butter." They ask: "Can you lend me a cup of it?" And you have to say: "Unfortunately, I cannot — but yes, it is there. It is just not yet manifested. I have milk, and milk contains butter." So truthfully, you have to say butter is there — you cannot say there is no butter. But to bring out that butter, you have to first make the milk into yoghurt or curds, and then churn it, and then butter comes out.

This is also an ''āvaraṇa'', a covering. Just like in the dark room you see only a piece of wood, not yet a chair, a table, or a bed — the effects of the wood are unmanifest. Two types of effects exist:

# One that is unmanifestly existing within something — like butter in milk, like a chair or table in the wood. This is called non-transactional or unmanifest butter, table, or pot.
# One that becomes manifest when the ''āvaraṇa'' (covering) is removed.

----

== Removing the Āvaraṇa: The Pot Within the Lump of Clay ==
What is that covering? Clay is in the form of a lump. A lump is also a type of form. But if you want a pot, you have to destroy the lump form and shape it into a pot form.

Out of the same lump, you can make any number of objects — a small pot, a big pot, a square jug, a round jug, tall or short, wide or narrow. So many forms are possible. But the very subtle point is this: if you want to see one particular form, you must destroy every other form and shape it so that only the desired form comes out.

So first, you have to destroy the lump form of the clay. Next, you must set aside every other form the clay could take. Only then does one particular desired form manifest. But ''potentially'', that form was always there.

So when you put on the light and see only a lump of clay — if you say "I don't see any pot here," it is not because the pot is not there, but because that clay is in the form of a lump. If you want to see a pot, you will have to destroy that lump form and manifest the pot form — the specific pot form that you require for a particular purpose.
----

== Conclusion: Brahman Alone Exists ==
What then is the conclusion of all these arguments?

The conclusion is that Brahman contains everything within itself. The lump form of Brahman, by comparison, is Brahman in its undifferentiated state. And the same Brahman, when it is differentiated into different objects, is what is called Sṛṣṭi — creation.

And the essence of all these discussions is this: '''Brahman alone exists.''' Then what about this world? Well — if you have a mind, then you see Brahman as world. If you do not have a mind, then you see the world as Brahman. This is the essence of the argument.

To sum up:

* There is a cause, and that cause is none other than eternal Brahman. That is the first essence.
* What is called the effect is nothing but the manifestation of the same formless existence in different forms. That is the second essence.
* And different forms, again, are perceived only with the help of the mind — which is itself an effect.

So when there is an experience of an object through another object, that is called Sṛṣṭi. When there is no object that can perceive, that does not exist, then that would be in the form of Brahman alone.
----

== Closing Remarks ==
Like this, there are so many big commentaries by Śaṅkarācārya — very highly stimulating, very useful for the intellect — but absolutely non-essential for progress in spiritual life. Simply take the meaning. Do not misunderstand the scripture, because you are reading only the first statement of the Upaniṣad. It is immediately followed by the statement that there was hunger, and that hunger was death. So there was ''something'' — but that something cannot be described.

With this, I stop today's class. We will continue further in our next class.

== Closing Prayer ==
''ॐ'' जननीं शारदां देवीं रामकृष्णं जगद्गुरुम् ।

पादपद्मे तयोः श्रित्वा प्रणमामि मुहुर्मुहुः ॥

''Om Jananīṁ Śāradāṃ Devīṃ Rāmakṛṣṇaṃ Jagadgurum''

''Pada Padme Tayo Śṛtvā Praṇamāmi Muhur Muhuh''

May Sri Ramakrishna, Holy Mother, and Swami Vivekananda bless us all with bhakti.

'''Jai Ramakrishna!'''
[[Category:Brihadaranyaka Upanishad]]

Brihadaranyaka Upanishad Ch.1.2 Lecture 13 on 07 March 2026

2026-05-30T19:25:34Z

Gopi: edited based on Swamiji's audio

Full Transcript (Not Corrected)

== Lecture on the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad: First Chapter, Second Brāhmaṇa (Agni Brāhmaṇa) ==

== Opening Invocation ==
ॐ पूर्णमदः पूर्णमिदं पूर्णात्पूर्णमुदच्यते ।

पूर्णस्य पूर्णमादाय पूर्णमेवावशिष्यते ॥

ॐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः ॥

'''OM PŪRṆAMADAḤ PŪRṆAMIDAM PŪRṆĀT PŪRṆAMUDACYATE'''

'''PŪRṆASYA PŪRṆAMĀDĀYA PŪRṆAMEVA VAŚIṢYATE'''

'''OM ŚĀNTI ŚĀNTI ŚĀNTI'''

'''OM'''

That Brahman is infinite, and this universe is also infinite. The infinite proceeds from the infinite. Taking the infinitude of the infinite universe, it remains as the infinite Brahman alone.

OM Peace, Peace, Peace be unto all.

= Introduction and Review of Previous Brāhmaṇas =
We are studying the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad in the first three Brāhmaṇas. I hope you remember that "Brāhmaṇa" means a section. The very first chapter, or indeed every chapter, of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad has several sections, and each section is called a Brāhmaṇa. We have taken up the first two Brāhmaṇas. These are very important.

I must emphasise that I am not going through every mantra. Only the very essential points and essential mantras will be taken up, and this will be both shorter and more useful than going through so many mantras. Why so? Because there are so many Upāsanās, and as I have reminded you many times, these Upāsanās are ancient Upāsanās. In those days, how the teachers explained to their students and how their students were directed to contemplate — we do not know.
----

== The Transformation of the Vedic Gods ==
The old Vedic Gods have been transformed into three main modern deities. They are called Viṣṇu, Śiva, and Śakti. Whether we talk of Gaṇeśa or Vighneśvara, or Kārttikeya, or Sūrya Devatā, or Agni Devatā — they are all somehow related to these three main deities.
----

== The Method and Purpose of Upāsanā ==
The methodology of Upāsanā remains the same, as I had already explained with the help of certain illustrations. Upāsanā means that by contemplating unbrokenly and continuously, one's idea — "I am so and so" — is transformed into "I am Īśvara," "I am Hiraṇyagarbha." It starts with Virāṭ: "I am Virāṭ," "I am the Universal." Then, "I am Hiraṇyagarbha." Then, "I am Īśvara." All these three together are called Saguṇa Brahma.

"I am Saguṇa Brahma" — and only human effort can go that far. After that, something automatically happens. When the person who succeeds in thinking "I am the Saguṇa Brahma" — and Saguṇa Brahma is a Vedāntic term — in the language of the devotees, we can call Saguṇa Brahma by various names: ''Ekaṃ Sat Viprāḥ Bahudhā Vadanti'' — as Rāma, as Kṛṣṇa, as Gaṇeśa, as Pārvatī, as Durgā, as Kālī — by any blessed name, it does not matter.

And that is also the right concept that we have: God is everywhere, God is everything, God knows everything, and God is capable of doing anything He wants. For His devotees — and a devotee is one who empties his heart and makes himself the very servant of God, so to say — God bestows upon him, removes the last barrier, and makes him attain ''Ahaṃ Brahmāsmi''. Whatever be the Upāsanā or contemplation, this is the goal and this is the end. This is called Mukti.
----

== Recap of the First Brāhmaṇa: The Aśvamedha Yajña ==
With this introduction, let us go further. In the very first mantra, we saw that kings used to perform a great Yajña called the Aśvamedha Yajña or Yāga, where a horse is let out and when it returns, the king gains mastery over all those people whose territories it has traversed. Then only can he perform this Yajña, and it is very expensive, time-consuming, and requires many people. The result? Such a great king, through this ritual called the Aśvamedha Yajña, attains Brahma Loka.

But there are many other people who would also like to attain that same Brahma Loka. How do they attain it? Instead of doing a physical Yajña or Yāga or sacrifice, if they go on doing the same thing mentally through contemplation — which is called Upāsanā — they can also attain to Brahma Loka. Upāsanā is a mental contemplation. It has nothing to do with the physical. In modern Pūjā it is called Mānasa Pūjā — mental worship. The purpose of worship and Upāsanā is the same; the process is also the same.
----

== The Nature of Brahma Loka and the Desire for Unbroken Happiness ==
Through Upāsanā, one can also attain Brahma Loka. Only then does the person become truly awakened. Even the happiness of Brahma Loka is temporary — it comes to an end. But by that time, the person understands: "I do not wish to have broken happiness. I want unbroken happiness." And in order to enjoy unbroken happiness, a person has to be, has to be conscious. That is why God is defined as ''Sat'' — to be; ''Cit'' — to be completely conscious; and ''Ānanda'' — to feel that "I am not deriving happiness from something else; I am of the very nature of happiness."

From the very beginning, no ordinary person can have any idea about Brahman. But we can have some idea about Brahma Loka. How do we get this idea? That is why in the Taittirīya Upaniṣad we get a very elaborate, though sample-like, analysis of Ānanda. From here a person attains to Gandharva Loka, then Deva Loka, then Bṛhaspati Loka, then Prajāpati Loka, then Brahma Loka. I have only described very briefly — there were eleven descriptions in all.
----

== The Purpose of Upāsanā: Avalambana and the Elevation of the Mind ==
The purpose of the Aśva Upāsanā, or meditation on the horse, is that the Aśva is only what we call a support — ''avalambana''. Some support must be there. Just as I gave the example of a small stone shaped in a particular way being called a Śālagrāma or Śiva Liṅga — to look upon this ordinary stone not as an ordinary stone but as representing Lord Viṣṇu or Lord Śiva — that is called Upāsanā. To see something very, very great in something very small — that is called Upāsanā. And as a result, the person's mind becomes great.

That is why we say: whatever we think, that is what we become. If we think we are small, we will become small — if not already small. But if we think about God, then we will become God.

Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa contemplated on Hanumān and became Hanumān even physically. He contemplated upon Rādhā and became Rādhā even physically. He contemplated upon Rāma and became one with Rāma. He contemplated upon Kṛṣṇa and became one with Kṛṣṇa. He contemplated upon Gopāla and became one with Gopāla. He contemplated upon Kālī and became one with Kālī. That is why we call him ''Sarva Deva Devī Svarūpa'' — that means he had become Brahman. And Brahman can be called by various names, as Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa teaches — so simple and yet so profound.

He gives the analogy of a lake or a big pond. Some people call the same substance "water"; some call it ''pānī'' or ''jal''; some call it ''aqua'' — but they all mean the same thing. Some call it "Allāh," some call it "Hari," some call it "Divine Mother," but the substance is the same.

So the purpose of Upāsanā is to slowly lift a Sādhaka endowed with Śraddhā — gradually, step by step — to that identity with Brahman. But the highest such step — not the roof, but the step — is called Brahma Loka.
----

== Gist of What Has Been Seen So Far ==
This is just the gist of what we have seen. We have also seen that the Upaniṣad starts with a big mantra describing how every part of the horse is comparable to some aspect of the universe. Just as in this universe we see five most important elements — space, air, fire, water, and earth — everything is a combination of these five elements. Time, space, and causation: that is what is called the mind; that is what is called the universe. The rest is a combination of all these things.

That is the purpose of this Upāsanā. Whoever contemplates upon it attains the result stated in the second mantra. The first chapter has several Brāhmaṇas, but the first Brāhmaṇa or section has only two mantras, and it presents a contemplation upon this entire universe.

By contemplating upon the horse as Virāṭ — as the Universal — we become universal. No longer do we say, "I am an individual," but we ''become'' an individual. Svāmī Vivekānanda used to make a joke: "You call yourself an individual — but are you really an individual? What is the meaning of the word 'individual'? That which is indivisible. But you are in several pieces; you are not really an individual. You have to ''become'' an individual — undivided." That is what is called Virāṭ.

And slowly, from the physical universal to the mental universal, to the causal universal — which is called ''Iśvara'' — and the combination of these three is called Saguṇa Brahma. The purpose of every Upāsanā is to take one to the last step, which is called Brahma Loka, which is also called Saguṇa Brahma.
----

== The Limits of Self-Effort and the Role of Grace ==
Once a person goes to Brahma Loka, further effort is not possible. Because effort — any effort, every effort — belongs only to the limited. But if we want to identify ourselves with the unlimited, we just cease to have any action. Actually, that is what happens. As we progress, all our efforts become less and less and less.

This is expressed in yogic language very beautifully: a billion, billion, trillion thoughts become a billion thoughts; a billion thoughts become a million thoughts; a million thoughts become a thousand thoughts; a thousand thoughts become a hundred thoughts; a hundred thoughts become twenty, then five, then three, then two, and finally one. That is called Savikalpa Samādhi — one single thought, continuing. That is as far as self-effort goes.

After that, it progresses toward infinity, but that is not desirable either. Another thought would be needed to remove that thought, and a third thought to remove the second thought. But God removes even that last thought. We go beyond the gross, the subtle, and the causal. That is what we have to understand.

All the mountains, all the rivers, every created being — living or non-living — some samples are given, and that is all we need to know. The Aśva is only an excuse to make this contemplation. That is very important for us to understand. That is all.
----

== The Second Section: Agni Brāhmaṇa ==
Now we enter into the second section, or second Brāhmaṇam. It is called the Agni Brāhmaṇam.

The Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad — I hope you remember — wants to talk about creation. According to the Taittirīya Upaniṣad, the Ātman manifested as space; space manifested as air; air became grossified as fire; fire became grossified into water; and water became grossified as earth (''Pṛthvī''). The whole universe that we experience is a culmination and combination of all these five elements.

When we come to the Chāndogya Upaniṣad, we have seen that only three elements are taken: Agni, Āpaḥ, and Pṛthvī. Now in this Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad, comparing it with the Chāndogya Upaniṣad, the first is fire; fire gave birth to waters; and water gave birth to earth — three elements, and three colours have also been given. We have discussed this elaborately: everything in this world consists of three colours, and even scientists have made the same discovery.

But in this particular place in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad, the first creation is waters. That means water is the cause: Brahman becomes waters, waters give birth to fire, and fire gives birth to Pṛthvī. This is how it is described here.
----

== Do Not Be Confused by Different Accounts of Creation ==
Now, do not go on getting confused because different Upaniṣads seem to say different things. The real purpose of the Upaniṣad is not to talk about creation. We think there is a creation, and creation is absolutely real so far as we are concerned. The teachers come down to our level.

There was a prince who used to think that a living snake had entered his stomach and was slowly growing. His stomach became bloated, and he was always fearful. Most people tried to cure him but could not. Then one clever man said, "I will easily cure him." He gave the prince a strong laxative at night, and the prince had a great purge. Immediately, that man had an assistant bring out a dead snake from outside and place it in the toilet. As soon as the prince came out, the man displayed it and said, "My medicine has worked. You have discharged that snake. Now you are free." It is all a psychological process. In fact, most of our diseases, according to psychologists, are only because of our psychological fears. People can even have a heart attack if they are terrified of something excessively.
----

== The Real Purpose of Describing Creation ==
The point is: the purpose of describing creation is not to say that creation is real. It is to take us step by step. This creation is an effect. Every effect must have a cause. That cause will have its own cause. That third cause will have a fourth cause. But we must come to the highest cause, which is itself causeless — in other words, it is eternal. And that which is eternal can only be infinite, and that which is infinite can only be eternal. Another name for it is Brahman.

Just to distinguish it from confusion with ''Brahma'' (the creator), one extra "n" is added. Actually, in Advaita Vedānta, we do not use the word with "um" — it is simply ''Brahma'', short. Tamil names will have that extended ending — but it is only ''Brahma''.
----

== Agni as the Subject of the Second Brāhmaṇa ==
So in this second Brāhmaṇa, there is actually a praise of Agni. Now, to praise someone, that person must be existing. So if you find somebody who is really great, who is very popular and very famous, naturally curiosity arises: Who is his father? When was he born? How long did he live? What did he do? All these questions come. For that purpose, people go on publishing biographies — short ones if they are not admirers, long ones if they are.

Here, Agni is eulogised. Why Agni? Because our very living itself is only because of Agni. Think of it — fire. Even your computer: ''ṭhaṇḍā ho gayā'' — if it is not going to work, it must be fiery. Your rocket — America was able to do so many things recently — it is all fireworks. And Dīpāvalī: we have small fireworks, but they have big fireworks. The difference is that there, fire can kill numberless people.
----

== Agni as the Source of All Life ==
The point here is that Agni is eulogised — uplifted as a great person. Why does the Upaniṣad want to do that? Not water, not earth, but fire — because it is our sun that is the very embodiment of our own selves. We are all small, infinitely small, manifestations of the sun only. Because we are what we eat, and what we eat is a piece of the sun.

If you are eating for breakfast a hamburger, or toast, or a piece of bread, or anything — it is a piece of the sun. Food is a piece of the sun. And "the sun" means light and heat, and that heat portion is Agni — fire. Wherever there is fire, you can immediately see it from a great distance. And if you go near, you can feel the heat. Light and heat — this is the very cause of this entire creation.

So the Upaniṣad, as I mentioned earlier, wants to praise Agni as part of the contemplation on Agni. From that Agni, the entire creation has come. And as I mentioned — do not go on getting confused. The Taittirīya Upaniṣad says something which caused creation; the Chāndogya Upaniṣad says something else. Actually, even the Chāndogya Upaniṣad says first there is only Agni, and it produced waters, and waters produced food or Pṛthvī, and the entire creation is nothing but a combination of those three elements.
----

== The Real Goal: Return to the Cause ==
As I mentioned just now, in this peculiar formulation, water is the cause of fire. But actually, everything is the cause of everything else — that is the truth. Anyway, this Sṛṣṭi — whether it is logical or illogical, and in which order it has to be presented — that is not the point at all. The point here is that this Sṛṣṭi is an ''ālambana'', a support. From here, slowly, like the young ones of the Homā bird, we have to climb back to the very cause of everything, which is Brahma. That is the real purpose.

Now, if we study the Upaniṣad without the commentary of Śaṅkarācārya, this is how we have to understand. These are the essential points: Sṛṣṭi is not important in itself. But because we think it is real, the Upaniṣad does not say it is unreal. The definition of the Upaniṣad of the word "unreality" is: seeing a big thing as a small thing — that is called unreal. That which is a small piece, that which is ever-changing, that which is always dependent upon something else — that is called unreality.

But in the end, the same Upaniṣad says: once you understand that everything is the manifestation — not creation, but manifestation — of Brahman, then you see a cow: that is Brahman. You see a dog: that is Brahman. You see a learned Brāhmaṇa: that is also Brahman. You see an eater of the flesh of a dog: he is also Brahman. You see an elephant: that is Brahman. You see a mosquito: that is also Brahman. Everything is Brahman. You see a mountain: that is also Brahman. Both the living and the non-living, the small and the big — no such distinction — everything is nothing but Brahman.

But this universal vision — that everything is Brahman — is possible only after reaching the cause. This is what Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa explains: this is not the roof. A man goes on climbing until he reaches the roof. And then, once he has the knowledge of the roof, when he comes down, the staircase is made of the same material as the roof, and all the steps are also made of the same material. All the rooms are made of the same material. Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa is articulating the same Upaniṣadic teachings in his own simple words.
----

== Śaṅkarācārya's Ghaṭa Bhāṣyam ==
Here in this second section, Śaṅkarācārya wants to make a point. What is that? The very first mantra of the second section begins with a very peculiar statement — like what we get in the Bible: "God created the world out of nothing." Now, no rational person would ever accept that, because nothing can be created out of nothing. If something is to be created, there must be ''something'' — it must be something. No logical, rational thinking person can ever accept such a statement.

The commentators on the Bible itself explain: "God had no other material; He is everything; therefore He Himself is the creator." But there are some peculiarities of those scholars that I will not go into.

What the Upaniṣads tell us is that for every product — every ''Kārya'', every effect — there must be three causes: the material cause, the intelligent cause, and the instrumental cause. Therefore, since there is nothing else excepting Brahman, the logical conclusion is that He must be the material cause, He must be the intelligent cause, and He must be the instrumental cause.

To make us understand that point, practically every Upaniṣad gives the example of the dream. When any one of us enters the state of dreaming, we see exactly as in the waking state. Who is the intelligent cause? Myself. What is the material? My own mind. And my thoughts are the instrumental cause. My intention — there is always an intention. Because my dream and your dream would not be the same. A child dreams that lots and lots of lozenges are hanging just in front of him, but unfortunately out of reach. A poor man dreams that lots and lots of money-bags are hanging in front of him. Our desires are not different — only according to our growing knowledge do we think that this is more important, and after some time something else is more important, and after some time something else again. That is all.

The same baby does the same thing. So what is the point? The point is that Brahman alone — one without a second — if the statement of the Upaniṣad holds true that this entire universe had come out of Brahman, then in this world we see, as an example, a pot (''ghaṭa''). A pot must have these three causes: what is the material cause? Clay. What is the instrumental cause? The potter's wheel. What is the intelligent cause? The potter, who decides how big, how small, and what shape the pot should be.

So we see that everything must have a cause. Every effect must have a cause. Whatever we experience is an effect. And every cause must be of three types: material, intelligent, and instrumental. But before creation, only Brahman alone is — nothing else exists. Therefore, naturally, where are the three causes? And Advaita Vedānta proclaims loudly: He is the intelligent cause, He is the material cause, and He is the instrumental cause.
----

== Why Did God Create at All? The Question of Līlā ==
Though it is not strictly necessary for us, because you are such intelligent listeners, I will tell you: why does God want to create all these things at all? Was He bored? For that, they say: no, nobody knows about it. There is no answer for it. That is why, when there is no answer, it is called ''Līlā''. But why does He want ''Līlā''? Why do I attend a drama? Because I am bored. So you cannot give the same argument to God. That is His will. You should not question what you cannot understand, because nobody can understand it and nobody can answer it. Therefore it is irrelevant why He did it.

But what is relevant is that we are limited — severely limited — and if you elect some bad president, that limitation will become even worse. How to get out of this limitation? That desire is expressed in the form of: "Is there a way out?" Yes, there is a way out. There is a beautiful saying: if there is a desire, there must be an object corresponding to that desire. If I want to become God, there must be a God — otherwise, the theory holds, such a desire would never arise. Do you ever desire to fly like a bird? Yes — and that is why you created the aeroplane. So that is the truth about it.
----

== The Ghaṭa Bhāṣyam: Overview ==
Now, what am I going to talk about here? It is a hymn — a praise of Agni Devatā, or Brahman in the form of Agni. If we just read the Upaniṣad without a commentary, we get the translation alone. But Śaṅkarācārya wants to write a big commentary, and therein the word ''ghaṭa'' (pot) is used several times — many, many times. The Sanskrit word for pot is ''ghaṭa'', and therefore this commentary is popularly known as the ''Ghaṭa Bhāṣyam''.
----

== The First Mantra of the Second Section ==
Why did this whole topic come up? So the Agni Brāhmaṇa — the second section of the first chapter of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad — the first mantra says:

नैवेह किञ्चनाग्र आसीत्, मृत्युनैवेदमावृतमासीत् अशनायया, अशनाय। हि मृत्युः तन्मनोऽकुरुत, आत्मन्वी स्यामिति । सोऽर्चन्नचरत्, तस्यार्चत आपोऽजायन्त; अर्चते वै मे कमभूदिति, तदेवार्कस्यार्कत्वम्; कं ह वा अस्मै भवति य एवमेतदर्कस्यार्कत्वं वेद ।। १ ।।

''Naiva iha kiñcana āsīt'' — "In the beginning, that is to say before creation, there was nothing whatsoever in this universe. By death, indeed, all this was covered — by hunger. For hunger is really death. 'Let me have a mind,' was his desire. And he created the mind. Then he moved about, worshipping himself."

Why was he worshipping himself? Because there was nobody else excepting himself.

"From him, thus worshipping, water was produced."

In fact, this applies to all of us. From birth to death, whom are we worshipping? Are you worshipping your mother and father? Yes. Why? Because they will give you food. For whom? For you. Why are you worshipping God? Because God will give you so many things — the four ''Puruṣārthas'': Dharma, Artha, Kāma, Mokṣa — everything He will give. It is all self-worship only. That is why one Svāmī advised me: "Be selfish." He was stating one of the greatest truths in spiritual life.

"Then he moved about, worshipping himself. From him, thus worshipping, water was produced. Verily, death thought: while I was worshipping, water was produced. That is why the ''artha'' (fire used in the horse sacrifice) is so called. Surely, happiness comes to him who knows how the fire came to be called ''artha''."

This is the first mantra of the seven mantras which we find in this second section.
----

== The Problem of ''Naiva Iha Kiñcana Āsīt'' — Nothing Was There Before Creation ==
I am not going further except where absolutely necessary. Now, this Upaniṣad begins this topic — the ''Sṛṣṭi'' topic — with the statement ''naiva iha kiñcana nāsīt'': a tremendous statement that nothing was there before creation. This statement creates a big problem for all of us.

When we say nothing was there before creation, it looks as if the Upaniṣad is talking of the ''Śūnyavāda'', because there are some philosophers whose philosophy holds exactly the same thing: there was nothing, and then somehow creation started. They cannot explain it because there is no cause-and-effect relationship there. This is one of the Buddhist schools of philosophy called ''Śūnyavāda'' — ''śūnya'' means absolutely nothing.

As I mentioned, the Bible also says God created out of nothing. Everything comes out of nothing, and whatever comes out of nothing goes back into — what? Nothing. Because every effect must go back to its own cause — there is no doubt about it.
----

== Śaṅkarācārya's Refutation via the Ghaṭa Example ==
Now, Śaṅkarācārya takes the example of a pot (''ghaṭa''). He analyses various theories of creation that existed at his time — by various schools of philosophy and various Ācāryas — and he dismisses them all as wrong. What does he want to say?

There must be a cause. And not only must there be a cause — that cause alone is the effect also. Let me simplify it for you.

You see a lump of clay. What do you see? You take it out, put your fingers in, spread it all over — do you see a pot? You don't see a pot at all. What do you see? A shapeless, formless lump of clay — that is all. It is formless.

Then what happens? You mix some water, make it into a thick paste, keep it on a wheel, shape it there, bake it, and then it becomes a pot. So now the question is: was the pot there, existing before, in that clay? One school of philosophy says there is clay, but there is no pot. But there are even bolder schools of philosophy — at least they think so. They say not only is there no pot, there is no clay either. Nothing — that is the ''śūnyavāda''. Nothing is there.

Śaṅkarācārya wants to prove that only a madcap — and madcaps are not considered ''Ācāryas'' — can think like that. So this is called the ''Ghaṭa Bhāṣyam''.
----

== The Chain of Causes and the Causeless Cause ==
If you see an effect, there is no doubt — you must accept that there is a cause. And in this world, what is our experience? What we call the cause of any effect that we see is not the final cause.

For example: what is the cause of the pot? Clay. But clay itself is an effect of something else — it is a combination of earth (''pṛthvī'') and water. So there are two causes. What is the cause of water? What is the cause of mud, ''pṛthvī''? And then where has that come from? From water — and water is itself an effect. Where has water come from? From fire. And from where has fire come? From air — you know, when you go on churning, you produce fire. And that is another example: can you bring out butter out of nothing? That is one of the peculiar examples Śaṅkarācārya gives. If you can produce butter without milk, then you can produce butter out of anything — even out of water. Then you would not need to buy any milk at all.

So every cause must have its specific cause. What is the cause of yourself? Your parents. What is their cause? Their parents. Go on like that. Finally, you must come to a causeless cause — a final cause, which is eternal. "Eternal" means it does not change. That which does not change does not have any other cause. So it is special.

And then there are some wonderful ideas about what is called cognition and recognition. Everything is a piece of thought — beautiful ideas. They are not strictly necessary for our spiritual progress, but they certainly stimulate our intellect.
----

== Conclusion ==
This we will take up in our next class and proceed further.

== Closing Prayer ==
''ॐ'' जननीं शारदां देवीं रामकृष्णं जगद्गुरुम् ।

पादपद्मे तयोः श्रित्वा प्रणमामि मुहुर्मुहुः ॥

''Om Jananīṁ Śāradāṃ Devīṃ Rāmakṛṣṇaṃ Jagadgurum''

''Pada Padme Tayo Śṛtvā Praṇamāmi Muhur Muhuh''

May Sri Ramakrishna, Holy Mother, and Swami Vivekananda bless us all with bhakti.

'''Jai Ramakrishna!'''
[[Category:Brihadaranyaka Upanishad]]

Brihadaranyaka Upanishad Introduction Lecture 05 on 07 February 2026

2026-05-21T23:06:45Z

Gopi: I changed the order of the text to match with Swamiji's audio.

Full Transcript (Not Corrected)

= Brihadaranyaka Upanishad: Introductory Discourse =

== Opening Invocation ==
ॐ पूर्णमदः पूर्णमिदं पूर्णात्पूर्णमुदच्यते ।

पूर्णस्य पूर्णमादाय पूर्णमेवावशिष्यते ॥

ॐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः ॥

'''OM PŪRṆAMADAḤ PŪRṆAMIDAM PŪRṆĀT PŪRṆAMUDACYATE'''

'''PŪRṆASYA PŪRṆAMĀDĀYA PŪRṆAMEVA VAŚIṢYATE'''

'''OM ŚĀNTI ŚĀNTI ŚĀNTI'''

'''OM'''

That Brahman is infinite, and this universe is also infinite. The infinite proceeds from the infinite. Taking the infinitude of the infinite universe, it remains as the infinite Brahman alone.

OM Peace, Peace, Peace be unto all.

== Introduction to the Study ==
We have been studying the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad. Still we are in the introductory stage.

In our last class, we had discussed a very very important point: what are called the means of obtaining right knowledge.

== Two Types of Knowledge ==
Knowledge is of two types:

=== 1. Worldly Knowledge (''Nitya'' or Changing Knowledge) ===
That which falls within the sensory organs, obtainable and obtained through the five senses plus mind. This is called worldly knowledge. In Vedantic terminology, it is called ''nitya'' or changing knowledge—not absence of knowledge, but limited, changing, dependent knowledge.

=== 2. Super-Sensory Knowledge (''Atīndriya Jñāna'') ===
The second type of knowledge pertains to things which are beyond the capacity of the sense organs, called ''atīndriya jñāna''.

I gave some examples: whether life is there after death, whether there are other worlds, whether there are other beings in other worlds, and whether there is God really existing. And as Hindus and a few others believe, whether the result of one's own past actions bears fruit in this life, called ''karma siddhānta''—whether it is real or not real. These truths cannot be obtained by any other means.

== The Six Means of Knowledge (''Pramāṇas'') ==
For this purpose, the Vedantic scholars—''ṛṣis'', actually—have found out six means, rather two instruments called ''pramāṇa''.

''Pramāṇa'' means the right instrument to obtain right knowledge pertaining to that particular instrument. As an example, telescope is the right instrument to see things which are far away in close proximity, and microscope is that which is to see almost invisible things, magnify them, see them very clearly. Each has its own separate utility and each cannot substitute the other.

=== The Problem of Emphasis ===
Knowledge also—both we require: worldly knowledge as well as super-sensory knowledge, ''atīndriya jñānam''. Our problem is we are placing too much emphasis on the worldly knowledge and judging even God by its standard.

=== The Six ''Pramāṇas'' ===
About these two ''pramāṇas'', or valid means of instruments—valid instruments of right knowledge—we discussed:

# '''Pratyakṣa''' (Direct perception)
# '''Anumāna''' (Inference)
# '''Upamāna''' (Comparison and analogy)
# '''Arthāpatti''' (Postulation or presumption)
# '''Anupalabdhi''' (Non-perception)
# '''Śabda Pramāṇa''' (Verbal testimony)

We also talked about ''āpta pramāṇa''—the knowledge of the people who have directly experienced God and other worlds, etc.—also called ''śāstra pramāṇa'', also called ''Veda pramāṇa''.

=== The Necessity of Both Types of Knowledge ===
These six means provide a complete knowledge of the mundane world. One important point we discussed: both are necessary.

For right knowledge, whether it is worldly or spiritual, always leads to better life, happier life, and healthy life, permanent life. So we have to use both, but in their own sphere.

== Scriptural Knowledge (''Veda Pramāṇa'') ==
Now coming to the ''Veda pramāṇa''—scriptural knowledge, ''Brahma vidyā'', knowledge of Brahman, which is also called ''ātma jñānam'' or "who am I"—my true nature is obtainable only through scriptural ''pramāṇa'', ''śabda pramāṇa'', Veda.

So a Bible is a Veda, and a Koran is a Veda; ''Tripiṭakas'' are the Vedas. But we have to be careful here: even in the Vedas there are so many types of information about worldly knowledge.

For example, how to attain spiritual progress—that doesn't fall under the ''śabda pramāṇa''; it falls under what we call sensory knowledge. You observe certain rules and regulations with regard to the body, with regard to the mind, then our life will be much better, happier, healthier, etc., yielding more happiness. But there is a limitation for this.

=== The Ultimate Purpose ===
So in the ''atīndriya jñānam'', the purpose is to lead us to that goal. Once anyone reaches that goal, then that is the end of evolution. He will become one with God, and that is the fate of everything in this world, living as well as non-living.

Of course, for that purpose, the non-living, the inorganic must become organic, slowly evolve. There is a wonderful truth discovered by Charles Darwin. We should not neglect—scientific knowledge is very valid, but within the sensory knowledge.

== The Meaning of ''Upaniṣad'' ==
So ''Brahma vidyā'' gives us the right knowledge, and that is also called ''Upaniṣad''.

So this ''Upaniṣad'' has two meanings:

=== Primary Meaning ===
The primary meaning of the word ''Upaniṣad'' is knowledge—that which destroys limitations and gives us right knowledge. Right knowledge is that knowledge which has no limitations.

=== Secondary Meaning ===
The second meaning of the ''Upaniṣad'' is the instrument through which these Upaniṣads are conveyed. For example, through the mouth of the guru, the words come out. That is only secondary means. One's own experience is the primary means.

Whatever I am talking in these classes, that is my understanding. I can only convey it through words, but you will have to listen carefully and make them your own. Nobody just by talking can give that knowledge.

Even Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa—he used to touch people, remove the obstruction so that the person can make his knowledge their own knowledge. Very cleverly he used to touch people.

=== ''Upaniṣad'' as Book and Knowledge ===
So one meaning of ''Upaniṣad'' is true knowledge conveyed through some instrument. That instrument is called the book, the ''Upaniṣad''.

So here ''śabda pramāṇa'' means every ''Upaniṣad'' is a book. That means words. What do the book or books contain? Words. Previously, when writing was not developed, it used to be processed, passed on and processed through words, through sounds coming out of the mouth in the form of words.

But words is not ''Upaniṣad''. The knowledge conveyed by the words is ''Upaniṣad''. And so long it is theoretical, it is not ''Upaniṣad''. It must become one's own practical knowledge. This we have to keep in mind.

== The Importance of Knowledge Over Words ==
How do we know? Because if ''Upaniṣad''—the book—can give us, then by this time we would have been free.

So all of us are repeating mantras. Mantras are nothing but certain repetition of certain sacred words. We should have got final knowledge. But we don't get, because those words have to be converted into really understanding, knowledge.

=== Knowledge Controls Our Actions ===
Only when it becomes knowledge, we are controlled by knowledge, right or wrong knowledge. This is a very important point.

If I believe truly this is the truth, then I am always controlled by what I know. If I know this bottle contains poison, even if it contains nectar, it can affect me. But if I think if somebody labels a bottle "this is poison," but I know the label is like that—inside it is pure nectar, ''amṛta'', which leads me to immortality—I cannot choose, because my knowledge never allows me to do anything other than what our knowledge directs us.

This is a wonderful point.

=== ''Vidyā'' and ''Avidyā'' ===
So if I don't have right knowledge, I will be having wrong knowledge. That is called ''avidyā''. ''Avidyā'' is not absence of knowledge, but wrong knowledge, wrong understanding. I will be guided.

For example, all of us are saying by mouth: everything in this world is temporary, changing, dependent, bringing in its aftermath only suffering. But though we are muttering these words, mouthing these words, but really speaking, we don't believe in it. But the day we believe, then we will be better people.

=== Example of Swami Brahmanandaji ===
Swami Brahmanandaji was about to give up the body. A doctor came with the name put in the form of three marks across his forehead. Maharaj looked at him and said, "Doctor, the name which you have put on your forehead alone is the reality, everything else..."

He was suffering from acute diabetes and he was feeling thirsty. He was asked if he would like to drink lemonade, and somebody—they already had prepared and kept it ready. When it was brought to him, he said, "Pour lemonade Brahman into Brahman." He knew everything was Brahman. He had not at that time, long before, but he did not express it in so many words all the time. But at this time, he could not hide. It came out openly.

=== What Destroys Ignorance? ===
So what is it that destroys ignorance, that destroys ''saṃsāra''? Is it the book or the knowledge gained from the book? Primarily, ''Upaniṣad'' means true knowledge. Secondly, the book is an instrument through which we can study the Gītā, Upaniṣads, Brahma Sūtras, Bible, Quran, Guru Granth Sahib, ''Tripiṭaka'', etc.

=== Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa's Example ===
This is what Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa says: If you are reading an almanac and it is predicted this year so much of rain will come, fall, and you squeeze the almanac as much as you like—not one single drop of water will ever come out of it. Why? It contains only knowledge. We have to wait for that knowledge to experience in course of time.

So if mantras, muttering of mantras, doing ''japa'' of mantras could themselves destroy our ignorance, then there is no need to learn the meaning. Merely by recitation, one can obtain that knowledge.

== The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad ==
Now let us apply this to any ''Upaniṣad'', but especially since we are studying the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad.

=== Content and Teaching ===
Although the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad contains so many ''upāsanās''—that is, meditations—it contains most of the time the highest Vedantic teaching. And it is expressed in two forms:

=== ''Neti Neti'' (Not This, Not This) ===
''Neti, neti''—not this, what you know; not this ego with which you identify. That which is negotiating, negating, that is not Brahman. And that instrument, egotism itself is not Brahman.

''Na iti, na iti''—two words. Why? Use two words. First word is to deny the result, the knowledge obtained through the instrument. Second, to deny the instrument itself. Once that instrument is destroyed, negated or merged in Brahman, what remains will be Brahman, which is expressed in the form of ''ahaṃ brahmāsmi'', the ''mahāvākya''.

=== ''Bṛhat'' Means the Biggest ===
So all this, this is, as we discussed, one of the biggest. ''Bṛhat'' means the biggest—not only in size, in quality, in expression and containing the highest truths.

So this Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad, if anyone studies, really speaking, he need not study any other ''Upaniṣad''. But the secret is, unless we start studying and absorbing slowly, beginning with perhaps Kaṭha Upaniṣad, then slowly Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad, then Īśāvāsya Upaniṣad, then Kena Upaniṣad—our ideas of understanding these Upaniṣads also will grow slowly. That is very important for all of us to understand.

And then when we enter into this either Chāndogya or Bṛhadāraṇyaka, our understanding will be much greater.

=== The 108 Upaniṣads ===
So all the important ideas contained in all the other Upaniṣads—some say there are 200, some say there are 108—but there is one ''Upaniṣad'' called Mukti Upaniṣad; there in 108 are mentioned. But Śaṅkarācārya has taken the trouble to write only commentaries—beautiful commentaries, unparalleled commentaries, most clarifying commentaries—on only 10 Upaniṣads. And Bṛhadāraṇyaka happens to be one.

=== Comprehensive Nature ===
So this Bṛhadāraṇyaka contains all the important teachings from every other ''Upaniṣad'', but we may not be immediately able to connect to them because of the change of language, metaphor, etc. This Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad is a complete comprehensive text.

So because it is big, if anyone asks where are these ideas, we can confidently answer: they are in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. You go and search. Of course, most of the people cannot search because it is so big, but it is there.

== Śaṅkarācārya's Commentaries ==
Now, as I mentioned, Śaṅkarācārya had chosen—and he must have, he knew all the Upaniṣads by heart—and his intellect could remember like AI, everything instantaneously will find out the same idea is found in this ''Upaniṣad'', in that ''Upaniṣad'', in the other ''Upaniṣad''.

How do we know? Throughout his ''bhāṣyams'', "this idea is there somewhere in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka; this is there in the Īśāvāsya"—so he will quote the mantras themselves.

In those days, this classification—this is chapter 1, this is section 1, this is mantra number 4 or 5—that classification was not done at that time, but he would remember the mantras. And if you obtain the printed Upaniṣads in Sanskrit or their exact translations with Śaṅkara bhāṣya, you will see all these references in either parenthesis or openly, because that is Śaṅkara's methodology of substantiating what he wants to make us understand: that you refer to this, this is the idea there.

=== Need for Commentaries ===
And there are many ideas which we will never understand without Śaṅkara bhāṣya. The simple reason for that is, first of all, it is an archaic language. Secondly, there are so many words—as you know, language changes, is changing all the time.

Even now, I cannot understand certain words, even as recently as six months. What is it called? "Double down," "doubling down." I didn't understand. I know doubling means 2 into 2 is 4, 4 into 4 is 16. What does this mean, "doubling down"? That means a person emphasizes something very strongly, repeats it many times. That is called "doubling down."

So new, new words are added. Old words naturally go out of vogue. And so many words have gone out. And the mystics, the ''ṛṣis'', they also use certain words. And sometimes there doesn't seem to be any etymological connection between what they uttered and what the ''Upaniṣad'' wants to convey, but for the commentaries of people like Śaṅkarācārya.

=== The Ten Principal Upaniṣads ===
Śaṅkarācārya had written commentaries on 10 Upaniṣads. And Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad is the smallest, having only 12 mantras. Then Īśāvāsya Upaniṣad has 18 mantras. So like that, these are the two small mantras.

Like in Bhagavad Gītā, we have two chapters which have only 20 ślokas, 20 verses: the 12th chapter, Bhakti Yoga, and the 15th chapter, Puruṣottama Yoga. They are the smallest chapters in the whole of the Bhagavad Gītā, which has a totality of 18 chapters.

=== The Largest Commentaries ===
And of all the commentaries on these 10 Upaniṣads, naturally there are two Upaniṣads which are very big. First comes the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. Second comes the Chāndogya Upaniṣad. And on Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad, Śaṅkarācārya's commentary is the biggest.

=== Śaṅkarācārya's Literary Excellence ===
And Śaṅkarācārya's language is a superb language. Śaṅkarācārya's hymns, if you are studying, or his ''prakaraṇa granthas'', or his what is called Advaitic texts—a ''prakaraṇa grantha'' is a special type of book emphasizing particular theories and elaborating on them specially, like ''Dṛg Dṛśya Viveka'', then ''Viveka Cūḍāmaṇi'' (of course, the most one)—so like that, so many ''prakaraṇa granthas'', besides his hymns.

Even ''Prātaḥ Smaraṇa Stotram'', etc., there are also profound Advaitic truths. Then ''Nirvāṇa Ṣaṭkam'', ''Kaupīna Pañcakam'', ''Mānīṣā Pañcakam''—everything in a simplified way, the highest Advaita Vedānta is squeezed into.

=== Nature of Śaṅkara's Commentary ===
So Śaṅkarācārya's commentary on the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad—it is called Śaṅkara bhāṣyam—is one of the biggest, runs into hundreds of pages. And every ''Upaniṣad'' is practically in the form of a ''sūtra'', means very brief statement.

Why do we say brief statement? Because we have to remember these Upaniṣads are the expressions of realized souls. They have to use language. And at the time of their living, thousands of years back, there was the art of writing not developed yet. That is why it is called ''śruti''.

=== Meaning of ''Śruti'' ===
One meaning of Upaniṣads or Vedas is called ''śruti''. ''Śruti'' means the knowledge that passed from the mouth of the teacher in the form of the teaching or words. And these words are heard—hearing. ''Śruti'' means hearing. And this continued for a long lineage. That is why it is called ''śruti sampradāya''.

=== Development of the Purāṇas ===
And based upon this, what these people heard, and when they were teaching, they used to quote some worldly examples to clarify the points, simplify the points, etc. And later on, some of them took the most important points, wanted to present them to ordinary people who are sincere, who are trying to lead a spiritual life, but do not have access to Sanskrit language or even to a great teacher, in the form of Purāṇas, mythological stories.

And so many illustrations of kings, great sages and saints, great men—all these are illustrated in the form of stories, etc. Like as we see Amar Chitra Katha. It contains the essence without too much deviation from the original, but easily understandable by children. And we are all grown-up children, whom Swami Vivekananda used to call "moustached babies."

== The ''Sūtra'' System and Mnemonics ==
So the ''Upaniṣad'' is in the ''sūtra'' form. And the ''ṛṣi'' used to, or his disciple, used to try to understand it from the exposition of his guru. And every ''sūtra'' in a very abridged form, that also became a mnemonic. Mnemonic means a simple way of remembering.

So this is a system of improving. Most of you must know about it. If you are going to a shop to buy certain items, and your memory is not good, this system is very useful.

=== Example of Mnemonic Association ===
So I want to buy a kite for my child. So kite is played by the child. And the child requires milk, chocolates, etc. And there are wonderful chocolates. And these chocolates have to be preserved. So they have to be kept in refrigerator. And so I have seen today that refrigerator, milk is not there. So my wife reminded me of it. And biscuits are not there. And oats are not there. Breakfast cereal is not there.

So associating in a picturesque form, and containing—so all that you need to remember is that a kite, your child, and child plays with the kite. And after playing, he becomes hungry. Then he requires food, favorite food. And that food has to be preserved. And the place where we preserve is refrigerator. And refrigerator is meant for storing so many items. So all these things are to be done. So this is the mnemonic.

=== How the ''Sūtra'' System Worked ===
So as soon as this ''sūtra'', first ''sūtra'' is stated, what it means—a brief explanation, then expansion of that expression, which is called ''vyākhyā'' or commentary. So as soon as a disciple remembers this ''sūtra'', all that he has to memorize is this ''sūtra''.

And the teacher, skillful teachers, they weave a web of beautiful stories, illustrations, analogies, metaphors. And parables etc., like Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa, immediately he remembers it.

But in course of time, these people who knew what the teacher had taught has been lost. The ''sūtra'' remained. But these great souls, like Śaṅkarācārya, Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, from their own respective point of view, they try to interpret.

But I think nobody could explain so beautifully word by word concept of this commentary. And Śaṅkara's language is also superb language, very mellifluous language. Like Jayadeva's ''Gīta Govinda'', like ''Kṛṣṇakarṇāmṛtam'', ''Abhilo Maṅgala''—even the very language attracts us so much.

== The Three Philosophical Schools ==
So our learned and experienced teachers, like Swami Vivekananda, they divide these. They also say, ''dvaita'' is the state in which we should be. We are not in the state of ''dvaita''. Not even in the state of ''dvaita''. Why? We are all seeing difference. That's not the point.

=== ''Dvaita'' (Dualism) ===
''Dvaita'' believes God exists—a firm, sincere, absolute faith: God exists. But I am not God. God is not me. He contains everything. But He is separate from everything. We are all separate from each other. And the world is separate from God. God is separate from us. God is separate from the world. God is separate from each ''jīva''. He is separate from everything. There are five differentiations Madhvācārya gives, or ''dvaita'' philosophy gives.

So that is the state. What is it? Definitely, 100% God exists. Okay. Then I have a lot of desires. I have to pray to Him. And He is very compassionate. And He will fulfill if I sincerely pray to Him. His grace descends. And therefore I have to pray.

Even though I am seeing the difference, even though I have a lot of worldly desires, but more and more I try to rely upon God rather than upon cleverness—how to become rich? How to obtain a position? How to flatter? How to butter other people so that I can get their ''ucchiṣṭa'', livings? No. I pray to God.

So it takes great spiritual practice even to become a ''dvaitin''.

=== ''Viśiṣṭādvaita'' (Qualified Non-dualism) ===
Then this next step is: so not only God is different, but He is also one. He is everything. Everything is in Him. Like a body, our physical body contains billions and billions of cells. Every cell is different. One cell dies. Another cell is born. Every cell has its own specialized function. So one cell cannot replace the other cell. But all are related. This is called ''viśiṣṭādvaita''.

God is everything. In that everything, everything is contained in God. He pervades everything. But everything is different from everything. But at the same time, everything is related to everything. And we are all related. So this is called ''viśiṣṭādvaita''. It is called unity in diversity. There is diversity. But there is also unity. This is a higher progress in our right understanding.

=== ''Advaita'' (Non-dualism) ===
Then comes the final understanding: there is no difference. Everything is only Brahman. We can't even call it one. Simply we have to experience.

So God is, has to be transformed into "I am that God." ''Brahma asti'' must be transformed into ''brahma asmi''.

=== Swami Vivekananda's Interpretation ===
This is how Swami Vivekananda interpreted: the lowest step leading to a higher step, and that middle step leading to the highest step.

So there is no need for us to quarrel which is right, which is no. But of course the ''ācāryas'', their followers, they never cease to quarrel. They always think their teacher is correct. That is the highest philosophy. And everybody else is ignorant, if not downright stupid and evil.

== Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa's Teaching ==
This is how we have to understand through the eyes of Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa's teachings and Holy Mother's teachings and Swami Vivekananda, direct disciples, that teacher of our lineage.

That is what Ramana Maharshi has also taught exactly, and that is squeezed into one beautiful aphorism: that is called, "Your sincerity is the only condition you need. Be sincere."

''Śraddhāvān labhate jñānam''—Bhagavad Gītā, 17th chapter. It affirms anybody who is sincere, because sincerity is a manifestation of divinity, and that person in course of time, God makes him understand the right thing. He manifests in the form of right understanding. And devotees also pray to Mother Gāyatrī.

=== Advaita Accommodates All ===
So this is how we have no quarrel within. Advaita has no quarrel with anybody. It accommodates everybody. So whatever accommodates everything without any conflict and yet becomes most beneficial and helpful—that is the take up by Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa and Swamiji, Holy Mother, direct disciples and their lineage, all of us.

== Ādi Śaṅkarācārya's Organization ==
So this commentary by Śaṅkarācārya—and we have to call him Ādi, original Śaṅkarācārya. Why? Because he established four centers.

=== The Four ''Maṭhas'' ===
He had four important disciples. He had many disciples, but four most important disciples. And all these disciples, being a very wise man—not only spiritually but practically—he knew that when two Indians, be they householders or monks, soon they start quarreling, overpowered by ''mahāmāyā'', egotism, and they start, they spoil the whole lot.

And wisely Śaṅkarācārya divided the whole of India into four parts: the East, the North, the West and the South. Established four branches called ''maṭhas'', and each one of his disciples he established as the guiding head of each center. And he told them, "Your sphere of sovereignty will be only this area, so the other person cannot come."

=== The Ten Monastic Orders ===
And if you want to guide some disciples, Śaṅkarācārya had created ten names, and three he had given to Śṛṅgeri Pīṭha, and sometimes two, sometimes three according to what he foresees right to the other three centers.

So these Śaṅkarācāryas had only the right, if they are giving monastic names, accepted monastic disciples, they can only pass on that particular name which their guru has given—Bhāratī, etc.

== Sureśvarācārya's ''Vārtika'' ==
So every ''Upaniṣad'' is in the form of the ''sūtras''. That is why commentaries are required. And if we are sincere, God provides us. God himself comes down in the form of these great ''ācāryas''.

And so these great ''ācāryas'', they expound each one of them according to their understanding. And what these people understand is suitable for a particular type of people.

=== Sureśvarācārya's Contribution ===
Then his own disciple, Sureśvarācārya—he studied this his guru's bhāṣyam, and he felt as a separate person, perhaps if this is interpreted in this way it would make better sense. So he wrote another commentary on Śaṅkara bhāṣya, and it goes by the name ''vārtika''.

This Sureśvarācārya has got a title: is called ''vārtikakāra'', because he has written three ''vārtikas''—that is, commentaries upon his own commentary upon his guru's commentary—on Taittirīya Bhāṣyam, Śaṅkarācārya, and on Dakṣiṇāmūrti Stotra, called ''Mānasollāsa''.

So that is how we get three ''vārtikas'', and a ''vārtika'' is even much bigger than the original Śaṅkarācārya's commentary.

=== Three Aspects of ''Vārtika'' ===
So what is the specialty of this commentary upon the commentary? It is:

# '''Uktam''' (Properly stated) - What has been said by his guru, if the disciples understand this is absolutely right, he keeps it as it is, trying to express it in his own words without any change.
# '''Duruktam''' (Improperly stated) - There are some expressions of his own guru; he, the disciple Sureśvarācārya, might think perhaps if this meaning is added or replacing what his guru has written, it will give a more unified meaning, better meaning, easy to comprehend. ''Duruktam'' means not properly interpreted, but because he is a ''śiṣya'', disciple with tremendous ''śraddhā'', it is not a criticism; it is only improving his guru's commentary.
# '''Anuktam''' (Not stated) - Some places maybe Śaṅkarācārya should have commented but did not comment; then Sureśvarācārya steps in and completes what he thinks should have been included by his guru. This is called ''anuktam''—not commented upon.

So improperly commented upon, and rightly commented upon, and all these three aspects in his own language—Sureśvarācārya (''ācārya'' means a teacher; Sureśvara was his name)—so what he had written goes by the name ''vārtika''. That's why he was called ''vārtikakāra'', author of the ''vārtikas''. So that is the specialty about Sureśvarācārya ''vārtika''.

== Śaṅkarācārya's Introductory Commentary ==
Now Śaṅkarācārya—he has got a very specialty. What is that specialty? That on every ''Upaniṣad'', before his commentary starts on the original text, he writes an introduction. That is called ''sambandha bhāṣya''.

''Sambandha bhāṣya'' paves the way to what is about to come, and certain concepts he wants to explain in a better way. So this is what is called introductory bhāṣyam.

=== Purpose of the Introduction ===
And through this introductory commentary, Śaṅkarācārya wants to elucidate, make clear to people like us that whenever you come across certain words—for example, ''karma'', for example, ''upāsana'', for example, ''jñānam''—what do they mean? What relationship they behave to each other? And what the opponents, what is their opinion about these concepts? Because to understand the commentary, we have to have very good comprehension of these basic concepts.

== Division of the Vedas: ''Karma Kāṇḍa'' and ''Jñāna Kāṇḍa'' ==
So in this bhāṣya, so what Śaṅkarācārya wants to say: what is the relationship between ritual and knowledge, between ''karma kāṇḍa'' and ''jñāna kāṇḍa''?

As you know, as we all know, that according to the classical classification, every Veda is divided into ''karma kāṇḍa'' and ''jñāna kāṇḍa''.

=== Purpose of ''Karma Kāṇḍa'' ===
''Karma kāṇḍa'' is a preparation for making every spiritual, sincere spiritual aspirant to convert him into a really speaking fit, worthy spiritual aspirant. And what would be the obstacles? Unfulfilled desires.

So fulfill some desires. The Veda ''karma kāṇḍa'' part of the Vedas do not say, "Go on doing this forever and ever." No, no, no. Do it, fulfill some of your desires.

That is what Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa used to say: "Fulfill some small desires." Big desires, when they come, did Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa say that you fulfill them? Definitely he said if your desire is strong, you have no other way but to fulfill them.

=== The Problem of Desire Fulfillment ===
And whenever we fulfill—like Raktabīja, like the demon called Raktabīja—every fulfillment increases the thirst, strengthens the desire, and suffering is inevitable. And after some such experiences we wake up and say, "How can I have this ānanda without suffering?"

Then says, "You now go to the next step," that is called: add mental contemplations called ''upāsanas'', about which I will briefly discuss in our next class, because very important to understand what is a ''upāsana''.

== Conclusion of Introduction ==
So this is how Śaṅkarācārya bhāṣya is there. It is huge.

=== ''Upāsana'' as Bridge Between ''Karma'' and ''Jñāna'' ===
What is a ''upāsana''? It is a link, a bridge between ''karma kāṇḍa'' and ''jñāna kāṇḍa''. On the one hand, it reduces the physical rituals into purely mental rituals. On the other hand, it relates every ritual to a higher aspect of divinity called Gods, and in our terminology: first to Virāṭ, then to Hiraṇyagarbha, then to Īśvara, and finally to Brahman. There is no other way. Step by step we have to go through them.

=== Spiritual Evolution ===
Some people are fortunate because they have practiced already—not that they have fallen from the sky and they find themselves ready to enter into ''jñāna kāṇḍa''. No, no, no. They have practiced so long.

Like some of the musical geniuses, like Mozart, for example—how many ''janmas'' he had practiced, God alone knows. But in this life his talents have come to the fore, and he started manifesting them, and he became unparalleled, great, one of the greatest creators of symphonies, etc.

But Hindus must believe this is the accumulated result of many, many years of prolonged practice—any field: scientific field, aesthetic field, or administrative field. Some are born with higher intelligence, some are with lower, but everybody will evolve: both mentally, intellectually, aesthetically, morally, finally Spiritually. There is no other way. So we will have to understand what is this upasana, how it works, which we deal in our next class.

== Closing Prayer ==
जननीं शारदां देवीं रामकृष्णं जगद्गुरुम् ।

पादपद्मे तयोः श्रित्वा प्रणमामि मुहुर्मुहुः ॥

''Om Jananīṁ Śāradāṃ Devīṃ Rāmakṛṣṇaṃ Jagadgurum''

''Pada Padme Tayo Śṛtvā Praṇamāmi Muhur Muhuh''

May Sri Ramakrishna, Holy Mother, and Swami Vivekananda bless us all with bhakti.

'''Jai Ramakrishna!'''
[[Category:Brihadaranyaka Upanishad]]