Mandukya Karika Lecture 118 on 30-August-2023

Full Transcript (under review)

We have entered into the fourth chapter called Alatāshānti Prakarna, Extinguishing of the firebrand.

What is that firebrand? Duality! One single pointed tip of any fire when it is rotated rapidly, forms a huge circle, giving us the illusion that it is a circle. But in fact it is only one, not many. That is the idea. Ātman is one, but this Jagat, world is many.

So even Gaudapādāchārya, highly devoted to God and Gurus. So first and second Kārikās are devoted to salutations to Guru Parampara. And this Guru Parampara is coming directly from Nārayana. So I salute that Nārāyana, from whom this marvelous Ajāti-vāda, Asparsha-yogā are coming down. And according to that knowledge, every Jivā is none other than Brahman.

And they are comparable to space. Space means one, indivisible, all-pervading, extremely subtle. This is just comparable to the Ātman. And then every Jīvā is not really different from that Paramātmā, that Nārayana, that jñeyābhinnena saṃbuddha. That is the goal, of course.

And in the second, here is something even more important. Salutations to that knowledge itself. Knowledge and the knower are not separate. They are absolutely one. Sri Rāmakrishna expresses it so beautifully, Nāma and Nāmi. Knowledge is called Nāma, and Nāmi, that which indicates, are not separate. So my salutations to this most unique, marvelous, true teaching. That is the Ajāti-vāda - no birth, no universe, no Jīvās at all.

He is going to expound, expand and expound, in the coming Kārikās. And he gave a special name - Asparsha-yogā. As I mentioned, Asparsha means coming into touch. Only when there are two things, and both must belong to the same reality, they can come into touch. Sugar and water, belonging to the same reality, can come together. Shadow and the person, an object, can never come together. They appear to be always together. A shadow, in fact, cannot be separated from the person. But the person belongs to one reality, and the shadow belongs to another reality.

( 05:43 mins )

And here, it is mentioned. What is it? Ātmā is one, infinite, pure consciousness; everything else is many, limited, and inert. Called, in other words, Mithyā. So Satya and Mithyā can never come together. That is what he calls Asparsha-yogā.

And what type of knowledge is that? Sarva, sattva, sukhaha, hitaḥ  . It restores one to one's original bliss. Gives tremendous bliss. Sarva Sattva, here Sattva means being. For every Jīvā, it is good. There is no division at all.

Hitaḥ - not only is it happiness, but it is most beneficial.

Avivādaha, there is no controversy, with regard to this.

Aviruddhaśca , it doesn't dispute with anybody.

So Deśitaha, here Deśita means not Deshika. Deshika - means the person, the Guru, from whom the teaching comes. Deśitaha - means what he teaches. So I salute that teaching itself.

अस्पर्शयोगो वै नाम सर्वसत्त्वसुखो हितः ।

अविवादोऽविरुद्धश्च देशितस्तं नमाम्यहम् ॥ २ ॥

asparśayogo vai nāma sarvasattvasukho hitaḥ |

avivādo'viruddhaśca deśitastaṃ namāmyaham || 2 ||

Salutations to Nārāyana and all the Guru Parampara, because of whom I also obtained this knowledge. And I salute that knowledge also, which is good, not only for a few people like me, but for everybody.

Why is it good? Because it tells them about their true nature, not what they mistakenly take as their nature. Like a person who says, I am Napoleon. That is not his true nature. Whatever he was, Rāma, Krishna, that is his real nature.

So what is our nature? Sat Chit Ānanda, Ekameva Advaiteyam. I am the Ātmā, I am Brahmā. That is the nature. We have seen in our last class up till now.

Actually, as I mentioned, this fourth chapter is a brief summary, as well as some of the verses have been literally put forward with a little bit of change of words. But in this fourth chapter, Gaudapādāchārya wants to summarise the entire teaching, repeat the entire teaching in different words.

Why does he want to repeat when he has already told everything? That is because he knows what we are. He knows that nothing sticks to our brains for a long time. So repetition is actually the best thing anyone can do.

And if I remember, I don't know whether people do it nowadays. People use, pupils use, students use, calculators and later on computers. But earlier, 2 into 2 is 4. 3 into 3 is 9. Like that, we had to do a lot of repetitions with loud voice. And each student will be competing, how to shout louder than the other fellow. And we have... It not only gave us that basic knowledge, foundation, but the most important thing is it improved our capacity, memory capacity.

That is why I am able to remember so many things even at this age. Just they come like a water flow. And even what I have memorised nearly 75 years back, even now I remember it. Thanks to all the repetition. So this is what he wants to say.

( 10:12 mins )

So what is he going to do from now onwards? Some of the core teachings he will rephrase and explain further. As I mentioned, nothing new is going to come. But as we go on expounding, some new ideas may come in our minds, which is for good. With this background, we will proceed to Kārikā number 3.

As I said, he is only rephrasing what he said earlier. What is called Ajāti-vāda. That is, the world was never born. So therefore, no Jīvā is born. Nothing is born. And we also have gone through some reasonings why that is so, but we will come to that again a little bit briefly.

भूतस्य जातिमिच्छन्ति वादिनः केचिदेव हि ।

अभूतस्यापरे धीरा विवदन्तः परस्परम् ॥ ३ ॥

bhūtasya jātimicchanti vādinaḥ kecideva hi |

abhūtasyāpare dhīrā vivadantaḥ parasparam || 3 ||

Quarrelling among themselves, that is, those who belong to the other schools of philosophy, other than, not only Advaita. Even among Advaitins, there are, later on two opposite schools have come. In fact, people may not know that not only what we call Vishishta-Advaita, then Dwaita, then Dwaita-Advaita, like that many classes are there. Among Advaitins themselves, quite a number of differences have emerged post Shankara.

Some people even say Shankarāchārya also, in some respects, differs from Gaudapādāchārya. At least one thing is very true - Shankarāchārya, there is quite an amount of Bhakti, devotion in him. Whereas in Gaudapādāchārya, he is called kattar advaitavadin. Kattar means extreme Advaitin, advaita-vādin. But anyway, it doesn't matter.

So if this is a fact, that is why to explain that if Ātman alone is true, then how come we experience this world, they have to coin several words. Ajnāna, Māyā, Mūla-vidyā, Tula-vidyā, and all these Gunas, etc., Mithyā, all these words indicating it is true we are experiencing something. But because it is Dwaita (many) it is not acceptable for certain reasons, which we have gone through, which we will also have an occasion to repeat. Because as Gaudapāda is repeating himself, we also will repeat in the explanation.

Now, in this third Kārikā, he has started attacking. Though he says, I do not attack, Advaita doesn't attack, etc., but it is a direct attack. Some schools of philosophy, some people who believe in a particular set of beliefs -

Bhutasya Jatim Ichchanti - That is, whatever is born, that again is born, or evolves.

And there are others, they come and say the exact opposite - Only a new thing is born. An old thing, an existing thing cannot be born. So, two schools of philosophy, Satkāryavādā and Asatkāryavādā.

Something is already there, so only that can manifest. Some other people know it must be something very new. Very briefly, we will expound this soon.

Quarrelling among themselves, some disputants postulate that an existing entity undergoes evolution, whereas other disputants, proud of their understanding, maintain that evolution proceeds from a completely new, non-existing entity.

Bhutasya - means whatever is existing.

Jatim Ichchanti - So, whatever was existing comes out, previously it was existing.

Then, what do you mean by that existing comes out into existence? It was in the form of unmanifest. Like a seed, the whole tree, the whole plant, every species, in the seed, (the baby) the entire man or woman, is there already in the seed of the mother and father.

( 15:12 mins )

But, to give a funny example also, some neighbour comes and asks, ‘Do you have butter?’ ‘Yes, yes, certainly I have butter.’ ‘Can you lend me some?’ ‘No, I can't.’ ‘Why?’ ‘It is in the milk.’

So, is it there or not? These kinds of disputations, why do you know? Because this AI was not there, present at that time, and they have plenty of time. Remember two important factors. Who are these fellows who go on doing? Sannyāsins! Because all Sannyāsins are not engaged in 24-hour meditation. One or two, three or four hours of meditation is more than sufficient. They get bored. After that, they want to get out of the boredom. So, they go on attending classes and studying. Sānkhya, Yogā, Nyāya, Vaiseshika, Purva-mimāmsa, Uttar-mimāmsa, and many, several schools of Buddhistic philosophy, Jain philosophy, etc.

So, every Bhāshya has three parts. Shankarāchārya Bhāshya, if you see, three parts will be there -

1. The first part is to explain the mantrās of the Upanishads as they exist.
2. The second part is to elaborate them, and then give the real practical sādhana point of view - how they can help us.
3. But the bulk of it goes only in trying to disprove the arguments of the opponents, and establish one's own school of Vedānta. That is why, unless a person knows what the opponents' thought is, it is impossible to understand what this man is trying to tell. Is it helpful for God-realization? No.

Then what is helpful? In two ways, this study is helpful.

1. One way is that if you don't think good things, you will be thinking horrible things. So, this thinking definitely replaces what is called the most horrible things. The mind will not go here and there. Provided, of course, we are really interested in these things.
2. The second is that it really sharpens the intellect. Logic, reason, it must be used to make ourselves more and more fit to understand the scriptural statements. So, this helps.

Beyond that, for the sake of realisation of God, simple faith in the name of God is more than sufficient. That is why Purandara Dāsa sings in this Kalikāla, the name of God alone is more than sufficient for giving one complete Moksha, without dependence upon anything else. So, kalau, harer nāma harer nāma harer nāmaiva kevalam. Only Hari Nāma. That is more than… Kaliyugadali Hari Nāmava. In Kali Yuga, only Hari Nāma. That is more than sufficient.

But why are we studying? Because it is, as I mentioned, highly helpful. Our intellect can become sharpened. And because it helps us to prevent our mind from going outside. So, be completely absorbed in Shruti. Of course, indirectly, it is only pointing out to God. There is no doubt about it. With this, let us go into this.

So, some people say there are two vādas. If this world, if this creation is real, is it coming from Ātman? So, if it is coming from the Ātman, was it really there in the Ātman? That means, their argument is, if this maniness, duality, has come from non-dual, then you cannot call it non-dual. Because non-duality is a term only for non-duality. But if this maniness is part of that, then you cannot call it, it has no right to be called non-dual. That is one of the arguments.

( 20:07 mins )

But, if it is not existent, something new is coming, then also the same problem will come. So, if it is existing also, it need not come. If it is non-existing, then duality is there. In either case, in both cases, if the world has come, and the world is limited, how can the unlimited become limited? That is the crux of the whole problem.

That is why Swāmi Vivekānanda, in his Jñāna-yogā, He must have been questioned like that. He says, ‘Ask me a logical question, I will give you a logical answer.’ What was the question? How did the infinite become finite? That is the crux of the matter.

So, there are two important schools of philosophy. One is called Sānkhyā. Another is Nyāya-Vaisheshika.

The Sānkhyans, what they say, I will give you a brief introduction. I have already given in my past classes, but just to remind ourselves. This is called Satkārya-vāda.

And Nyāya-Vaisheshika is called Asatkārya-vāda. Asat means completely new.

Let us take an example. Clay and pot. Pot is the effect. Clay is the cause. Now, if there is cause - it can be called a cause, only if there is an effect. And if there is an effect, an effect by definition is something that comes out of a cause. So, without cause, effect cannot be. Without effect, cause also cannot be.

Now, this example of clay and pot. Clay is the cause and pot is the effect. And we see a pot. Now, these two schools of philosophy, what is their argument? Is the pot something new, which was not there in the clay? The other party says, no, a new thing can never come. It was there.

Then the Sānkhyās adopt Satkārya-vāda. Sat means already existing, (unmanifest). Therefore, nothing new can come. So, the argument goes like this. If something new can come from something completely unrelated, we don't need to buy any oil from anywhere because we can take a lot of sand and then squeeze it - First class oil! Which oil? Any oil that you desire. Coconut oil, refined sunflower oil. Any oil you want, it will come out. Will it come out? No! Sunflower oil will come only from sunflower.

So, a pot can come because it is a clay pot. Clay pot can come only from clay. If it is silver pot, it can come only from silver, etc. This is what we call Satkārya-vāda. Sat means the pot is already pre-existing in an unmanifest form. Then how did it come out? The potter, the wheel, etc., he doesn't bring anything new. He only takes the clay and gives a particular shape to it. Previously, the pot was shapeless, nameless, formless. Now, it has got a special shape, special name, special form. This is called Jāti-vāda, Satkārya-vāda.

But the Nyāya-Vaisheshika people say, no, no, no, we don't accept that view. So, if it was already there, then where is the need for it to come out? If the pot was already there, you are saying the pot came out of the pot.

No, that is not the point. The point is the pot was there in an unmanifest form. So, that is called Satkārya-vāda.

And a lot of months or maybe years are spent in quarrelling with each other. And of course, my guess is whoever can out-shout (always like lawyers), they will win the case. This is what Gaudapāda wants to say. Satkāryavādins and Asatkāryavādins, Sānkhyā-yogā people and Nyāya-Vaisheshika people, go on quarrelling with each other.

And then what do they do? This party quashes the other party's arguments. The other party's arguments quash this person's argument. So, both of them become argumentless. So, Satkārya-vāda is destroyed, Asatkārya-vāda is also destroyed. That means they are saying nothing is born. Because the quarrel is only when something is born. And they prove that it is not born at all. How can you quarrel if something is not born? That is the idea.

( 25:35 mins )

This is what he is telling. He is laying a foundation.

Abhūtasya - That which has never - has become, what is called, a new thing has come.

parasparam vivadantaḥ - They go on quarrelling with each other. With this background, Gaudapāda is trying to conclude it.

bhūtaṃ na kiṃcid jāyate -This is Kārikā number 4.

भूतं न जायते किंचिदभूतं नैव जायते ।

विवदन्तो द्वया ह्येवमजातिं ख्यापयन्ति ते ॥ ४ ॥

bhūtaṃ na jāyate kiṃcidabhūtaṃ naiva jāyate |

vivadanto dvayā hyevamajātiṃ khyāpayanti te || 4 ||

As I mentioned earlier, this party quashes the other people's arguments very effectively. And the other people, they squash their opponents. That means both their arguments completely become destroyed. And when their arguments are destroyed, their schools of philosophies have no special existence at all. That is what he wants to say.

That means what? There is no Jāti. Jāti means what? Birth. When there is no pot, whether it was an existent pot that came out or whether it was a non-existent pot that came out, all these things are possible only if there is a birth, there is a manifestation. When there is no manifestation, no pot at all, looking at the clay, whether it is Satkārya-vāda. Kārya means effect. So, whether it is Satkārya or Asatkārya, those arguments themselves are completely meaningless because nothing is born.

So, it is like - a baby is not born, and the husband and wife, a young man and a young woman, are quarrelling whether the baby is male or female. Somebody asked, ‘Why are you quarrelling?’ ‘No, no, no. We are quarrelling about the baby.’ Then those fellows, intelligent fellows, they asked, ‘Are you married?’ They said no. ‘Are you about to get married? Thinking of getting married?’ ‘No, no. We don't like each other. We are not going to marry at all. Not only in this life, another 1000 lives.’ ‘Then why are you quarrelling?’ ‘Just passing some time. That's all.’ This is what Gaudapādāchārya wants to say.

So, if something is already existing, there is no need for it to be born.

And if it is non-existing, then it is never going to be born.

Thus, these two people, they are quarrelling. Bhūtam means that is Satkārya-vādins.

Abhūtam means new, something new. That is what the Asatkārya-vādins, Nyāya-Vaisheshika people. So, both of them, let them quarrel.

Vivadantaha - thus quarrelling.

Dvayāha means both of them with each other. What do they do? They quash each other. They destroy each other's argument. Both of them become what? Argument-less.

Ajātiṃ khyāpayanti te - What is that? There is no pot at all, born pot at all. When there is no pot….

Here, what is the analogy? Pot means this world. Is this world born from Brahman? Or is it not born? We see this world. Yes, you see so many things in your dream. You see a snake also, where there is no snake. But that doesn't mean the snake is real or the world is real.

In fact, a wonderful definition is given. Only in the light of those definitions, our understanding becomes clearer. What is that one we are talking about? See, if something is continuously changing, that is called Mithyā. And what definition will you give to something which is continuously changing?

( 30:03 mins )

I know you are intelligent people. I will give you an example. Suppose you meet a person somewhere. You don't know that person. And then you ask him, What is your name? ‘My name is Rāma’. And the next second, somebody else comes and asks, ‘Sorry, I never met you. What is your name?’ ‘Oh, my name is Krishna.’ And somebody else comes, ‘What is your name?’ ‘My name is Gopā.’ Like that, he goes on changing. Somebody else comes, ‘Where do you live?’ ‘In India.’ Somebody else, ‘Where do you live?’ ‘In Australia.’ ‘Where do you live?’ Like that, he goes on changing about himself. What would be your conclusion? There is something seriously wrong with the person.

Because we can only get knowledge of a thing when something never changes. If something is changing, that knowledge will be always changing. A changing knowledge is not a right knowledge at all. That is why in the three times, Trikāle yat abādhitam tat eva satyam - Whatever exists in the three times without changing, that alone is Satyam. We have to keep these kind of definitions in mind. Then only things become very clear.

When the world is… You are experiencing no doubt, you are experiencing so many things, you are experiencing a mirage, you are experiencing silver in a silver shell, we are experiencing dreams, we are experiencing snakes, and we are experiencing enemies, where there are no enemies. We are experiencing friends, where there are no friends. Since everything is changing, you cannot pin down anything as permanent. That which is impermanent is called Mithyā. And Mithyā can never be Satyam. That is called Asparsha. This is the argument. And it is a marvellous argument.

So, what does Gaudapada want to convey to us in this fourth Karika? These different schools of philosophy. He only mentioned two. But every school of philosophy has their own ideas about creation. So, he says, you go on quarrelling. I don't need to quarrel with you because I am very intelligent. You go on quarrelling. And you go on defeating each other, destroying each other. Then none of the arguments will remain. Then what happens? By that you prove that something is not at all born. And that is what we are starting to shout from the very beginning. Pivadanta means to speak. Pivadanta means to argue. Dvaya is two schools. By implication, it means etc. etc. That means any other school other than your Advaita. He evam evam. Thus, ajatim khyapayanti. They, all of them, khyapayanti. So, ultimately, prove. What do they prove? Ajatim, that is, the world is never born and Jeeva is never born. That is the meaning of this fourth Karika. The existent cannot again pass into birth, called second existence. That is Asatkaryavadas. Nor can the non-existent be born or come into being as existent. This is called Satkaryavadas. Thus, they are disputing among themselves. They, as a matter of fact, tend to establish the Advaita view and support the ajati means unborn, never born, or the absolute non-birth of what exists. So, I have discussed. And this Sankhya school of philosophy, by the way, is also called Prakruti Parinama Vada. Parinama means change. Vada means school of philosophy, a way of thinking, school of thinking. Prakruti. According to them, in the presence of Purusha, pure consciousness, Prakruti, which consists of Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas, and before the birth of the world, it was in a state of equilibrium, but for some reason, the equilibrium gets disturbed and then Prakruti becomes Vikruti and then Mahat, Ahamkara, Sokshma Pancha Bhutas, Sthola Pancha Bhutas, Manaha, Buddhi, Chitta, Ahamkara, that is, the evolutes of the subtle five elements. Then these very subtle five elements manifest as gross five elements, Pancha, Sthola, Bhutani, and they mix with each other, which is a peculiar process called Panchikaranam and the whole universe, including our body, it is the resultant of this Panchikaranam. So Prakruti becomes the entire universe, which includes our physical bodies and the same Prakruti becomes our mind with the help of the five subtle elements, also called Tanmatras. That is how so many schools of philosophy go on quarrelling with each other. But one thing is Advaita is non-dualism and everything else is realism. So all the other schools of philosophy belong to the dualism, debating in this manner, negate each other thereby, indirectly giving credence to the theory of non-origination, Ajati Vada. We now proceed to the fifth Karika. Khyapya manah ajatim tayi anumodam anumodamahe payam vivadamo nataihi saartham avivadam nivodatam So Gaurapadacharya is preening himself, he is praising himself, he is slapping his own back, he is praising himself, he has done very well. So what is he telling? We, the Ajati Vadins, you see, he has noticed something, we the Advaitins, he is not even telling we the Advaitins, we the Ajati Vadins, he wants to establish this Ajati Vada. It was not a word coined by Gaurapadacharya. Most probably, some Buddhistic schools of philosophy have already done it. We, the Ajati Vadins, approve the Ajati or non-creation. Non-creation means the world is never born. If the world is not born, creation is not there, the question of Jivatma also doesn't arise. So we do not have any quarrel with them because they destroyed themselves. And we don't need quarrel because they have sufficient quarrel among themselves and they are destroying themselves. I remember a Hithopadesha story, a very beautiful story. Once there was a quarrel between two animals. They got some bread material and these two foxes, they were quarreling. One wants more part, more portion and the other one also wants more. They were quarreling. So they referred it to a monkey. The monkey said, I will make peace with you. So he divided into two. How did he divide? Unevenly. One portion was more and the other portion was less. He said, Oh, this will not solve the problem. The monkey was exclaiming himself. So he said, I will make this bread equal. So he bit off more than the other portion. That bread became even more uneven. Then he said, No, no, this will not do. So he bit off and ate. Finally, he ate the whole bread and said, this is the only way to solve the problem. And now, I don't know what I should call. So that is the Hithopadesha story. So all of you go on destroying each other. But this Ajati Vada, a special type of Advaita Vada, is alone true. So Khyapya Manaha, means they loudly proclaim Ajati, our theory of Ajati, non-birth. How? By quarreling with each other and destroying effectively each other. When you yourself are destroying each other, why should I take the trouble to destroy you? That is what he wants. And then he says, Anumodha Mahe Vayam. So we thoroughly approve you are destroying each other. So that my theory stands alone, stands true. And so he makes it even more clearer, Taihi Sartham Na Vyavadhamo. Taihi means those other dualistic schools of philosophies. Sartham means with them. Na Vyavadhamo. We do not need to quarrel. We do not quarrel. There is no need for quarrel. Therefore, our proposition, that Ajati Vada, Avivadham Nibodhata, it is quarrelless. It is disputeless. This is the highest reality, which is free from all disputations. That's all. We don't need to know more about it. Then we move on to the 6th Karika. Ajatasyaiva Dharmasya, Jati Micchanti Vadinaha, Ajato Hi Amruto Dharmo, Martyatam Kadameshati. A beautiful rationality is presented. Reasoning is presented to us now. What is it? He wants to now describe about the Atma. Forget about the other people. What does he say? Ajatasyaiva Dharmasya, Jati Micchanti Vadinaha, Ajato Hi Amruto Dharmo, Martyatam Kadameshati. The disputants, that is all those other than Advaitavadins, all dualists, contend that the ever unborn, never born or ever unborn, changeless entity called Atman, how can it undergo any change? That means it never undergoes any change. How does an entity, which is accepted by everybody as changeless and immortal, partake of the nature of the mortal? As I said, very, very beautiful argument and we better know about it. Because these doubts might not come at this moment, but they are sure to come in future. So, this is the description of the Atman. What is the description of Ajataha? It is never born because birth means change. Any birth means change. It is called Parinamavada. You know it already, but I will just give you to remind ourselves. Parinamavada means something really changes. For example, milk changes into curds. That is called Parinamavada. Whereas, Advaithins, remember, Vivartavada, appears to change. Appearance only, that appearance is not in what we perceive, is a very, very, very important point. I will illustrate it so that you will understand it. Appearance is not reality. To illustrate it, take the familiar classic example of the rope and the snake in semi-light. Little light is there because we have to see the rope. What do we see? We see a snake. So, this snake, later on we understand, I thought it was a snake. So, this is like two deaf people met. They knew each other. One deaf fellow asked the other deaf fellow, Are you going to the market? And that fellow said, No, no, no, no, no. You are not saying right. I am going to the market. And this fellow thought, Oh, I thought you are going to the market. So, it will be like that. So, where is the snake? It is an appearance. Where is the appearance? In our brains, in the perceiver's mind. Nothing happened to the rope. It will remain a rope. No change will ever take place. The change takes place only, I thought it was a snake and light is brought. Then the snake changed into rope. Fortunately, once I know about it, then it is absolutely fine. Sometimes mistakes also can happen. A real incident took place several years back in UK. In UK, in most of the places, snakes are very, very less. One day, a woman entered into a toilet and then she saw above that bath tub, there was a black crack. So, she thought the fellow who built it has not done a proper job and in the course of time it developed. First time she noticed it. So, some time passed. Again, she was noticing it now and then suddenly she noticed that it was moving. Then she brought light and saw it was a long snake really. So, don't think that sometimes you apply this Sarparajubhranti. Of course, she phoned immediately the animal rescue people. They don't care for human beings. But whenever they hear an animal is trapped or something, they come and say we have done the greatest job. Anyway, coming back to this. So, the appearance is in our minds but the truth never changes. This is called Vivartavada. Now, what does Godapada wants to convey to us? The Atman is Ajata, means never born. It was not born from something else and something else is not going to be born from that. Because if the milk, if the curds is born from the milk, then milk also doesn't remain milk and this curds also is slightly different from the milk. Main ingredients will be there. So, if Atman is unborn and if this creation comes out, definitely the Atman will change. Not only that, and it can never go back. Beautiful meaning is there. So, Dharma means its nature. Some people say that this unborn Atman becomes this world, that means gives birth to this world, like that. of the unborn. What is its Dharma? Dharma means nature, original nature. Amrutaha, is immortal. Immortal means what? It is one. It is infinite and it is unlimited by time and space. It is of absolute bliss, absolute existence, absolute knowledge, absolute bliss. That is its nature. Now, that is the real nature. That is its original nature. Now, if it changes, remember, change means deviating from the original nature. That is anything that birth itself is change. If it is really changing, then what is the change? The changeless becomes changeful. The changeless becomes changeful. The Sat becomes Asat. The Chit becomes Achit. The Ananda becomes its opposite. The One becomes many. The infinite becomes finite. The unlimited becomes limited. This is the only possibility. If day changes, it can only change into night. If darkness changes, it can only change into light. If good changes, it can only change into evil. If happiness changes, it can only change into unhappiness. Even slightest less happiness is a deviation. So, What is the nature of this Atman, which here Gaudapada calls as What is it? Immortal. Immortal means infinite, unchanging, limitless. Martyata. Martyata means limited, finite, changeful. Nitya becomes Anitya. Satya becomes Asatya. Ananta becomes Sushanta, etc. Is it not irrational? Rationality doesn't tell us if something changes. It cannot be the original thing. It must be something else. The disputants contend that the ever unborn, changeless entity can never become changeful. And an entity which is changeless and immortal can never partake of the nature of the mortal. And I will give a brief explanation given there. We will take only one word. What is it? Supposing the Atman is born and he is called a Jeevatma. What is Jeevatma? A mortal, that is called Martyata, subject to death. What is death? Limitation. Not only the physical body disappearing, it is called limitation. So what happens? Supposing this Jeevatma, who is born, who is limited, who is always changing, who goes on changing every way, that is birth, growth, middle age, old age, disease, death, shed, or miss, sixfold changes take place. That means Atman also will go through all those things. Supposing this Jeeva, somebody comes and tells God is there and you are that God and then you do Sadhana and one day you will become God. Suppose he does it. So after so many billions and billions and billions of births, he becomes God. Aham Brahmasmi. What did we say in the beginning? That Brahman became a Brahman. So after reaching what do you become? Again a Brahman. And again do Sadhana. Again become Brahman. Then again become a Brahman. Because once Brahman becomes a Brahman, what is our argument? That it will never again change. Changeless will never change. Changing something will always change. This is the beautiful argument. We will talk about it, a little bit of it. And this is only for our reminder what we have studied so far. I will stop here. Om Jananim Sharadam Devim Ramakrishnam Jagadgurum Pada Padme Tayo Sritva Pranamami Muhurmuhu May Ramakrishna, Holy Mother and Swami Vivekananda bless us all with Bhakti. Ramakrishna.