B.G 2.18

antavanta ime dehā nityasyoktāḥ śarīriṇaḥ । anāśino'prameyasya tasmādyudhyasva bhārata ॥2-18॥

These bodies are perishable, but the embodied being is said to be eternal and indestructible like the immeasurable Lord Aprameya; therefore, fight, O Bharata.

Gīta Bhāshya 2.18

Only an individual being can be addressed with the word 'śarīriṇaḥ', because only an individual being has a destroyable body. 'aprameya' i.e. immeasurable, refers to the Lord. The individual being is like a reflected image of God, eternally dependent, at the same time everlasting. Its eternal adjunct is the true nature as consciousness.

bhavatu dehasyāpi kasyacinnityatvamiti। netyāha - antavanta iti। astu tarhi darpaṇanāśāt pratibimbanāśavadātmanāśa ityata āha - nityasyeti। "śarīriṇaḥ" iti īśvaravyāvṛttaye। naca naimittikanāśa ityāha - anāśina iti। kutaḥ? aprameyeśvarasarūpatvāt।

Suppose, if someone considers even the body to be eternal; the verse 'antavanta', denies the same. If we doubt the destruction of the individual being, similar to the destruction of the mirror destroying the reflections, the word ‘nityasya’, i.e. eternal, rejects the same. By using the word 'sharirina', i.e. one who resides in the body, the divine body of the God is excluded (from destruction). The word 'anashina' shows there is no destruction for the causal body of the Lord. Why? Immeasurable lordship, 'aprameya', by his very nature is without limits.

nahyupādhibimbasannidhyanāśe pratibimbanāśaḥ, sati ca pradarśake. svayamevātra pradarśakaḥ. cittvāt. nityaścopādhiḥ kaścidasti॥

Not indeed, in the presence of the limiting adjunct (upādhi), the original image is destroyed, when there is destruction of the reflection; and when the revealer (mirror, etc.) exists. Here, the revealer itself is indeed (present), because of consciousness. And that limiting adjunct is eternal.

"pratipattau vimokṣasya nityopādhyā svarūpayā। cidrūpayā yuto jīvaḥ keśavapratibimbakaḥ।"

"Upon realization of liberation, the individual soul, joined with its eternal adjunct of true nature as consciousness, is the reflection of Lord Keśava (Viṣṇu)."

iti bhagavadvacanāt ॥18॥

- thus states the testimonial spoken by Lord.

Gīta Tātparya 2.18

The indestructible and immeasurable properties stated in 2.17 and 2.18 are regarding God and not Jīva. The destructibility is the speciality of the physical body. But that does not mean a union of Jīva's identity with the Lord after liberation. Even the liberated continue to have a distinct identity with their non-physical body similar to the Lord. Upanishad statements emphasize the all pervading nature of God and not the union of distinct identities between the liberated and the God. They retain their distinct identity even after liberation. By experiencing one's own atman, one can know the God, the Īshwara. The insentient and the beings differ from the Lord. Nine examples in Chandogya Upanishad show a difference between Jīva and the lord only. They show His all pervading nature, not union with Jīva. The world is called 'pra-pancha' as it consists of the five types of eternal differences. The word 'īśvara' means the Lord, the owner. He owns both sentient and insentient. Both sentient and insentient ever depend on the Lord. Non-dualist thinking of considering the world and beings as illusion or non-different from the Lord is inconsistent with the Vēdic statements that convey speciality to the Lord. The concluding remarks of all branches of knowledge show distinct identity only. The non-dualistic hypothesis cannot explain how illusion arises again and again from the blissful defect free Brahman.

The indestructible and immeasurable properties stated in 2.17 and 2.18 are regarding God and not Jīva.

śarīriṇāṃ tu dehahānyādinā nāśo vidyate eva. "yena sarvamidaṃ tatam" iti tasyaiva lakṣaṇakathanāt na jīvānāṃ deśataḥ guṇataśca pū"rṇatā. anicchayā da"hānyādereva duḥkhāvāptiḥ siddhā. tasmādanāśino aprameyasya viṣṇoḥ pūjārthaṃ yuddhyasva. tatprasādādhīnatvād duḥkhanivṛtteḥ sukhasya ca.

The embodied beings certainly experience destruction of physical body because of killing and other factors. Since it is said, "By whom all this is pervaded," (verse 2.17), the characteristics of God alone are described, not the fullness of living beings by place or quality. Despite not wanting it, individual souls still experience misery, such as burning and so on. Therefore, fight the war as a worship of Lord Vishnu, who is indestructible and immeasurable. The cessation of sorrow and attainment of happiness depend on his grace.

"ye tu sarvāṇi karmāṇi mayi saṃnyasya mat-parāḥ। teṣām ahaṃ samuddhartā।"

"But those who dedicate all actions to me and are devoted to me — I am their deliverer."

(gītā 12-6) ityādeḥ।

– stated in Bhagavad Gita 12.6

jīvapakṣe "nityasyoktāḥ" ityuktatvāt "anāśinaḥ" iti punaruktiḥ. "avināśi, yena sarvam idaṃ tatam" ityuktasyaiva "anāśinoprameyasya" iti pratyabhijñānācca.

In the context of the living being (In the verse 2.18), since it is already stated as "of the eternal", calling it "imperishable" is a repetition. The phrase "O imperishable, by whom all this is pervaded" (2.17) — since it was already stated, the phrase 'anāśinoprameyasya', i.e. "of the imperishable, the immeasurable" (2.18) is to be recognition with the Lord.

The destructibility is the speciality of the physical body. But that does not mean a union of Jīva's identity with the Lord after liberation. Even the liberated continue to have a distinct identity with their non-physical body similar to Lord.

"ime dehāḥ" iti viśeṣaṇān nityaś-cidānandātmakaḥ svarūpabhūto deho muktānām api vidyata iti jñāyate.

It is understood from the qualification, 'ime dehahah' i.e. "these bodies", that even the liberated ones possess a body of the nature of eternal consciousness and bliss.

"na vartate yatra rajastamastayoḥ satvaṃ ca miśraṃ na ca kālavikramaḥ। na yatra māyā kimutāpare hare- ranuvratā yatra surāsurārcitāḥ॥ śyāmāvadātāḥ śatapatralocanāḥ piśaṅgavastrāḥ surucaḥ supeśasaḥ। sarve caturbāhava unmiṣanmaṇi - pravekaniṣkābharaṇāḥ suvarcasaḥ॥ pravālavaiḍūryamṛṇālavarcasāṃ parisphuratkuṇḍalamaulimālinām। bhrājiṣṇubhiryaḥ parito virājate lasadvimānāvalibhirmahātmanām॥ vidyotamānapramadottamābhiḥ savidyudabhrāvalibhiryathā nabhaḥ॥"

"Where three qualities of 'satva', 'rajas', and 'tamas', and their mixture does not act; where there is no influence of Maya, the illusion born of ignorance; where both gods and demons worship Lord Hari and act under Him; where the liberated with blue bodies, sparkling eyes like the thousand petal flowers, wearing exquisite cloths, all having four arms, who are adorned with jewels and precious beads, who are glowing with essence, effulgent, wearing ear ornaments and flower garlands, splendid and full of valour, shine in various ways. Those superior beings dwell in planes along with their consorts in effulgent lit-up skies."

iti hi bhāgavate।

- indeed, stated thus, in the Bhāgavata Purāṇa.

"cidānandaśarīreṇa sarve muktā yathā hariḥ। bhuñjate kāmato bhogāṃstadantarbahireva ca॥"

"All liberated beings, possessing bodies of consciousness and bliss, similar to Lord Hari, enjoy pleasures at will both internally and externally."

iti paramaśrutiḥ।

- stated thus, in the Parama Sruti, the vedic testimonial.

na ca jīveśvaraikyaṃ muktāv api।

Even in liberation, there is no unity between the individual being and the Lord.

"idaṃ jñānam upāśritya mama sādharmyam āgatāḥ। sarge'pi nopajāyante pralaye na vyathanti ca।"

"Those who, taking refuge in this knowledge, have attained my nature, are neither born at creation nor suffer at dissolution."

(gītā, 14-2)

–Bhagavad Gita 14.2

"yo veda nihitaṃ guhāyāṃ parame vyoman। so'śnute sarvān kāmān saha brahmaṇā vipaścitā।"

"He, the wise one, who knows what is hidden in the cave of the supreme space (space within the heart) attains all desires together with the all-knowing Brahman."

"etam ānandamayam ātmānam upasaṅkramya। imān lokān kāmān nī kāmarūpy anusañjaran। etat sāma gāyan āste।"

"Having attained this Ātmān made of bliss, he moves freely among these worlds and desires, taking forms at will, singing this Sāman, and abides thus."

"sarve nandanti yaśasāgatena sabhāsāhena sakhyā sakhāyaḥ। kilbiṣaspṛtpituṣaṇirhyeṣāmaraṃ hito bhavati vājināya।"

"Everyone (the Liberated beings) rejoices at the arrival of the renowned champion of the assembly, the Lord; friends are united by friendship. The one who removes sin and delights, the father, is truly beneficial and sufficient for their steed."

"ṛcāṃ tvaḥ poṣamāste pupuṣvān gāyatraṃ tvo gāyati śakvarīṣu। brahmā tvo vadati jātavidyāṃ yajñasya mātrāṃ vimimīta u tvaḥ।"

"The Liberated Brahmas, one is engaged in chanting the Vēdic hymns, the other is engaged singing the hymns of Gayatri and shakvārī meters, the third is narrating the knowledge of creation, the fourth is mediating on the order of sacrifice".

"paraṃ jyotir-upasampadya svena rūpeṇa abhiniṣpadyate sa tatra paryeti jakṣan krīḍan ramamāṇaḥ. strībhiḥ vā yānaiḥ vā … . tadā vidvān puṇya-pāpe vidhūya nirañjanaḥ paramaṃ sāmyam-upaiti."

"Having reached the supreme light, he is established in his true nature. There he plays, travels, and enjoys as per his/her desire… There, devoid of the past impressions due to good and bad deeds, with pure disposition, he obtains the most exalted nearness to the Lord".

"muktāḥ prāpya paraṃ viṣṇuṃ taddehaṃ saṃśritā api। tāratamyena tiṣṭhanti guṇair ānanda-pūrvakaiḥ॥"

"Even after attaining the supreme Viṣṇu and resorting to His body, the liberated ones remain distinguished by gradations, according to their qualities, all of which are characterized by bliss."

bhūpā manuṣyagandharvā devāḥ pitara eva ca। ājāneyāḥ karmadevās tattva(rūpāḥ) devāḥ purandaraḥ॥ śivo viriñcirityete kramāc chataguṇottarāḥ। muktāv api tadanye ye bhūpāc chataguṇāvarāḥ॥ na samo brahmaṇaḥ kaścin muktāv api kathaṃcana। tataḥ sahasraguṇitā śrīs tataḥ paramo hariḥ॥ anantaguṇitatvena tatsamaḥ paramo'pi na।

"Kings, gandharvas, gods, ancestral-gods, action-gods, principle-gods, Indra, god Rudra, and the creator Brahma are each a hundred times greater than the previous. The humans who differ from these are a hundredfold lower compared to Kings. No one, not even among the liberated, is equal to Brahmā in any way. Thousand times superior to Him is goddess Shri. Infinitely superior to her is Lord Hari. None can equal or surpass Him."

akṣaṇvantaḥ karṇavantaḥ sakhāyo manojaveṣvasamā babhūvuḥ। ādaghnāsa upakakṣāsa u tve hradā iva snātvā u tve dadṛśre। kāmasya yatrāptāḥ kāmāstatra mām amṛtaṃ kṛdhīndrāyendro parisrava॥

"Their friends, endowed with eyes and ears, became unequalled among those who are as swift as the mind. Some reached up to the knees, some up to the armpits; in you, as if having bathed in a lake, they appeared. Where the desires of desire are attained, there, make me immortal; let Indra, for Indra, flow around."

Upanishad statements emphasize the all pervading nature of God and not the union of distinct idenities between the liberated and the God. They retain their distinct identity even after liberation.

ityādi mokṣānantaram api bhedavacanebhyaḥ।

These statements clearly show the difference between liberated and the God even after liberation.

"yatra tvasya sarvam ātmaivābhūt tat kena kaṃ paśyet।"

"But where of him? When everything has truly become the Ātmān, then by what means and whom would he perceive?"

"yad vai tan na paśyati paśyan vai tan na paśyati।"

"That which one does not see, even while seeing, indeed, does not truly see."

"na hi draṣṭur dṛṣṭer viparilopo vidyate।"

"There is indeed no cessation of the seer or of seeing."

"avināśitvān na tu tad dvitīyam asti । tato anyad vibhaktam yat paśyet ।"

"Because of imperishability, there is truly no second to it. Therefore, whatever else one perceives is specially separated."

"paramaṃ brahma veda brahmaiva bhavati।"

"Whoever knows the supreme Brahman truly becomes Brahman indeed."

"tat tvam asi।"

"You are that."

"ahaṃ brahmāsmi।"

"I exist in Brahman." / "My existence is that of Brahman."

na ca ityādi-vākya-virodhaḥ।

The above statements do not oppose the earlier quoted testimonials.

By experiencing one's own Ātmān, one can know the God, the Īshwara.

"sañjñānāśo yadi bhavet kim uktayā naḥ prayojanam। mohaṃ māṃ prāpayāmāsa bhavān atreti coditaḥ॥ yājñavalkyaḥ priyām āha nāhaṃ mohaṃ bravīmi te। bhūtajñānalopaḥ syān nijaṃ jñānaṃ na lupyate॥ na ca jñeyavināśaḥ syād ātmanāśaḥ kutaḥ punaḥ॥"

[The conversation between Yajnavalkya and Maitreyi in Brihadaranyaka Upanishad is quoted for clarity.]
"If there were loss of consciousness, what use would words be for us? You have caused me to fall into delusion here—thus questioned. Yājñavalkya said to his beloved: I do not speak delusion to you. There may be loss of knowledge of beings, but one's own knowledge is never lost. Nor can the knowable be destroyed; how then could the self ever be destroyed?"

vabhāvataḥ parādviṣṇorviśvaṃ bhinnamapi sphuṭam। asvātantryādbhinnamiva sthitameva yadedṛśam॥ tadā ghrāṇādibhogaḥ syātsvarūpajñānaśaktitaḥ। tadātmānubhavopi syādīśvarajñānameva ca॥ yadānyaṃ na vijānāti nātmānaṃ neśvaraṃ tathā। puruṣārthatā kutastu syāttadabhāvāya ko yatet॥ tasmātsvabhāvajñānena bhinnā viṣṇusamīpagāḥ। bhuñjate sarvabhogāṃśca muktireṣā na cānyathā॥

The insentient and the beings differ from the Lord.

yanna paśyet paro viṣṇuḥ dvitīyatvena sa svataḥ। taddvitīyaṃ na bhavati prādurbhāvātmakaṃ vapuḥ॥ pradhānapuruṣādanyat yattasmāt bhinnamīśvaraḥ। vibhaktatvena niyataṃ yasmāt paśyati sarvadā। paśyanneva yato viṣṇuḥ tadabhedaṃ na paśyati। cetanācetanasyāsya nābhedosti tatomunā। na hi jñānaviloposti sarvajñasya pareśituḥ॥

That which the supreme Lord Vishnu does not perceive as different from himself, that does not become differentiated post manifestation. As he sees the unmanifest prakrti and the beings as different, they differ from the Lord. Though different, He is seen to control them always. Thus, some sages perceive the beings and the insentient as non-different from the lord Vishnu. Indeed, there is no loss of knowledge for the omniscient, the supreme ruler.

brahmāṇi jīvāḥ sarvepi parabrahmāṇi muktigāḥ। prakṛtiḥ paramaṃ brahma paramaṃ mahadacyutaḥ॥ naiva muktā na prakṛtiḥ kvāpi hi brahmavaibhavam। prāpnuvantyapi tajjñānānnijaṃ brahmatvamāpyate॥ yadyasya parameśatvaṃ tadā syādduḥkhitā kutaḥ।

duḥkhī cetkuta īśatvamanīśo hyeva duḥkhabhāk॥ kutaḥ sarvavidojñatvaṃ kva bhramopyajñatāṃ vinā। tasmānnaiveśvaro jīvastatprasādāttu mucyate॥

All living beings are addressed with the term 'Brahma'. Similarly, the beings who have attained liberation are addressed by the term 'para-brahma'. Prakrti is addressed as 'pramam-brahma'. But more significant than that is Supreme Achyuta. Never it is possible to attain the glory of Brahman by either liberated beings or Pakrti. When they are said to attain 'Brahmatva', it only means they attained the accurate knowledge of Brahman to their capacity. If beings are Supreme Lords, then why do they experience misery? If a being is suffering, how can he be the Supreme Lord? If being is the all-knowing omniscient, how can illusion and ignorance arise in Him? Therefore, the living entity is not God, and God's grace liberates him.

aheyatvadahaṁnāmā bhagavānhariravyayaḥ। brahmāsau guṇapūrṇatvāt asmi asau asanānmiteḥ। asanādasināmāsau tejastvāt tvamitīritaḥ। sarvaiḥ kriyāpadaiścaiva sarveḥ dravyapadairapi।

sarvaiḥ guṇapadaiścaiva vācya eko hariḥ svayam। yuṣmatpadaiḥ prātiyogyāt tadyutaiśca kriyāpadaiḥ। asmatpadairāntaratvāt kriyārthaiśca tadanvayaiḥ। parokṣatvāttatpadaiśca mukhyavācyaḥ sa eva tu।

As He can never be avoided (as both Prakrti and Jivas depend on him), the inexhaustible Supreme Lord Hari is called 'aham'. As all auspicious qualities are complete in him, he is called 'Brahma'. As he is without limits, he is called 'Asmi'. As he has self-effulgence, he is called 'tvam'. All the verbs, all the substantives, and all the qualitative primarily only convey Lord Hari himself. As he represents capability in everyone that is of value, the term 'yushmat' and all the verbs constituted by 'yushmat' convey Him. As he is stationed within everyone, the term 'asmat' and all verbs that are rooted in 'asmat' convey Him. As he is the doer, though he is invisible, the term 'tat' primarily conveys Him.

Nine examples in Chandogya Upanishad show a difference between Jīva and the lord only. They show His all pervading nature, not union with Jīva.

sarvān vedān adhītyaiva prajñādhikyena hetunā। śvetaketura-haṅkārāt prāyaśo nāsmi mānuṣaḥ॥ devo vā keśavāṃśo vā naiṣā prajñānyathā bhavet। evaṃ mahattva-buddhyaiva darpa-pūrṇo 'bhyagāt pituḥ॥

[Clarification is provided regarding 'tatvamasi' statement from Upanishad.]
Śvetaketu, having studied all the Vedas and being superior in wisdom, became proud and generally thought, 'I am not a mere human; I am a god or a portion of Keśava.' Otherwise, such wisdom would not exist. Thus, filled with pride due to his sense of greatness, he approached his father.

sakāśam-akṛtācāraṃ taṃ dṛṣṭvā stabdham-ajñavat। pitovāca kutaḥ putra stabdhatā tvām-upāgatā॥ prāyo nārāyaṇaṃ devaṃ naiva tvaṃ pṛṣṭavān-asi। yasmin jñāte tu avijñāta-jñānādīnāṃ phalaṃ bhavet॥

Observing the misbehaviour of his son filled with ignorance, Father enquired–"Hey Son, why are you filled with false ego"? Probably you have not enquired about the all-pervading lord Narayana. If you understand Him, you will gain a deep understanding of other things as well that are not studied directly.

prādhānyāt sadṛśatvācca tadadhīnamiti sphuṭam। tatsṛṣṭaṃ ceti vijñātaṃ phalavadviddhi bhavejjagat। svātantryeṇāsya vijñānaṃ mithyājñānamanarthakṛt॥

From the study, it becomes clear that He is the primary and everything else is always under His control. The firm understanding that the world is His creation results in a better understanding of the world. To understand oneself or the world as independent is wrong knowledge and results in downfall.

yathā caivaikamṛtpiṇḍa jñānādeḥ sadṛśatvataḥ। mṛṇmayaṃ tadakāryaṃ ca jñātaṃ mṛditi vai bhavet। yathaiva mṛttiketyādinityanāmapravedanāt। vācārabdhamanityaṃ tu jñātaṃ tanmūlamityapi।

By studying a lump of clay and by knowledge of its properties, it is possible to understand and know the clay and objects made of clay elsewhere. Similarly, by understanding the meaning of the eternal root word 'mrutika' (clay), we come to know the meaning of non-eternal, derived words meaning as well.

evaṃ kāraṇabhūtosau bhagavān puruṣottamaḥ। pradhānaśca svatantraśca tanmūlamakhilaṃ jagat। tadādhāraṃ vimuktau ca tadadhīnaṃ sadā sthitam। sa sūkṣmo vyāpakaḥ pūrṇaḥ tadīyamakhilaṃ jagat। tasmāt tadīyaḥ tvamasi naiva so'si kathaṃcana।

Similarly, by knowing Lord Purushottama, the supreme among beings, as the primary cause, as independent, as the root, one can know the universe as well. He supports even the liberated beings. He is subtle, all-pervading, and complete; all the universe belongs to him. Therefore, you are his; you are never He in any way.

yathā pakṣī ca sūtraṃ ca nānā vṛkṣarasā api। yathā nadyaḥ samudraś ca yathā vṛkṣaparāv api। yathā dhānāḥ paraś caiva yathaiva lavaṇodake। yathā puruṣadeśau ca yathājñajñānadāv api। yathā stenāpahāryau ca tathā tvaṃ ca parastathā। bhinnau svabhāvato nityaṃ nānayorekataa kvacit।

[Examples from Chandogya Upanishad chapter 6 are explained]
As between a bird and the thread, between nectar and various trees; As between rivers and ocean, between the tree and the God; As between seeds and the invisible, between salt and water; As between Purusha, i.e. person, and the country in which he dwells, between an ignorant person and the giver of knowledge; As between the robber and the stolen object, so too you and the other are always separate by nature; there is never unity between the two.

evaṃ bhedokhilasyāpi svatantrāt parameśvarāt। paratantraṃ svatantreṇa katham aikyam avāpnuyāt। sa jīvanāmā bhagavān prāṇadhāraṇahetutaḥ। upacāreṇa jīvākhyā saṃsāriṇi nigadyate। tadadhīnam idaṃ sarvaṃ nānyādhīnaḥ sa īśvaraḥ।

Thus, how could that which is dependent ever attain unity with the independent Supreme Lord? The word 'Jīva' is primarily addressed to the Lord as He sustains life. For the sake of worldly transactions, the being is addressed as 'Jīva' secondarily. These examples show that the Lord, Īshwara, is never under the control of anyone. Everything is under His control.

The world is called 'pra-pancha' as it consists of the five types of eternal differences.

jīveśvarabhidā caiva jaḍeśvarabhidā tathā। jīvabhedo mithascaiva jaḍajīvabhidā tathā। jaḍabhedo mithasceti prapañco bhedapañcakaḥ। viṣṇoḥ prajñāmitaṃ yasmāt dvaitaṃ na bhrāntikalpitam। advaitaḥ paramārthosau bhagavān viṣṇuravyayaḥ। paramatvaṃ svatantratvaṃ sarvaśaktitvameva ca।

The universe, called 'pra-pancha' (literally to mean five-fold difference) is characterized by fivefold differences: the difference between the individual being and God, the difference between the insentient and God, the difference among individual beings, the difference between the insentient and the individual being, and the difference among insentient objects. As Lord Vishnu is aware of these five differences, they are not illusionary. As Lord Vishnu is the supreme purpose and unchanging, he is called 'advaita', the one without a second. He has the qualities of supremacy, independence, and omnipotence.

sarvajñatvaṃ parānandaḥ sarvasya tadadhīnatā। ityādayo guṇā viṣṇoḥ naivānyasya kathaṃcana। abhāvaḥ paramadvāite santyeva hyaparāṇi tu। vikalpo vinivarteta kalpito yadi kenacit। advaitaṃ jñānināṃ pakṣe na tasmāt vidyate kvacit। ityādiśrutibhyaḥ arthāntarasyaiva avagatatvāt।

Omniscience, supreme bliss, and dependence on that - are qualities attributed to Lord Vishnu alone, not to anyone else. There are no lacunas in the supreme 'advaita', the one without a second, that exist in others. Even if such characters are imagined by others, they will finally be corrected. In the perspective of the wise, non-duality does not exist anywhere. Thus, from these Vedic sentences, the difference only can be deciphered, emphasizing the comprehension of an alternative meaning.

ekapiṇḍanāmadheyetiśabdānāṃ vaiyarthyaṃ cānyathā। na ca ekavijñānena sarvavijñānaṃ tatpakṣe। na hi śuktijño rajatajña iti vyavahāraḥ। navakṛtvopi bhede eva dṛṣṭāntokteśca। tasmādatattvamasiityevocyate।

Otherwise, the statements such as "One egg", and "One body from another" are not required (as the word 'one' is used to show the difference with the other). Also, it will be inappropriate to state, by knowing one item, knowledge of all items is possible (as there is only one item as per non-dualists). Also, it is not a norm in the world that a knower of the purity of silver is also the knower of silvery illusion. In all nine examples, we can decipher differences only. Therefore, what is said is "atatva masi", i.e., 'you are not that', i.e. 'You are different' in the Upanishad.

Note: The Upanishad statement "सर्वं तत्सत्यं स आत्मातत्त्वमसि श्वेतकेतो(6.9.4) as per Madhavacharya needs to be split as "सर्वं तत्सत्यं स आत्म अतत्त्वमसि श्वेतकेतो”

The word 'īśvara' means the Lord, the Owner. He owns both sentient and insentient. Both sentient and insentient ever depend on the Lord.

aitadātmyamityetadātmasambandhi, tatsvāmikam. tvamapi tadaitadātma mevāsi na sosīti vā. taditi liṅgasāmyaṃ cātra. avidyamānameva īśvaraṃ sṛṣṭyādikaṃ ca aprāptameva ātmano bhinnatvena prāpayitvā tanniṣedhe kathaṃ śruteḥ unmattavākyatvaṃ na syāt?

(This does not conflict with the previous phrase "एषोऽणिम् ऐतदात्म्यमिदं सर्वं", as it only indicates everything is related to "Ātmān" and is owned by Him.) So, the entire sentence means "You are having the all-pervading 'Ātmān' as your owner, and you are not the same as Him". This interpretation is grammatically compliant with 'tat' being a neutral gender as well. Otherwise, we have to interpret the "Lord" who does creation and other activities as non-existent, as his existence as Lord is possible only if He is different from the beings. By rejecting it (creation activity of the Lord), several Vedic statements lose their sanity.

anuvādopi "yadidaṁ vadanti tanna yujyate" ityādivākyaṁ parihāre viśeṣayuktiṁ ca vinā na dṛṣṭaḥ। atiprasaṅgaścānyathā। abhedānuvādena bhedopadeśaḥ kimiti na syāt?

If one argues these earlier statements are paraphrased initially to reject them, it is inappropriate. Such statements do not provide a resolution and add unwanted special logic. It becomes overthinking as well. Why would an interpretation trying to teach non-duality end up teaching difference as well?

Non-dualist thinking of considering the world and beings as illusion or non-different from the Lord is inconsistent with the Vēdic statements that convey speciality to the Lord. The concluding remarks of all branches of knowledge show distinct identity only.

sarvaśākhānte bhedokteśca etadeva yuktam।

In the concluding remarks, all branches of knowledge advocated the distinct identity only. So, it is prudent to interpret accordingly.

"na asaṃvatsaravāsine prabr"yāt na apravaktre ityācāryāḥ ācāryāḥ"

"Until one stays for one year, demonstrates good conduct, and exhibits the ability to teach others, one should not teach the secret knowledge."

"ahaṁ viśvaṁ bhuvanam abhyabhavām"

"I transcend the universe and am far superior in quality to that which has come into being."

"anante svarge loke jyēye prati tiṣṭhati prati tiṣṭhati iti brahmavido viduḥ"

"The knowers of Brahman understand that it stands eternally in the superior heavenly world."

"namo viṣṇave mahate karomi"

"Offer my obeisasalutationsnces to Lord Vishnu, the great!"

"paśyantyātmanyavasthitam"

"They perceive it as situated within themselves."

ityādi॥

- thus states various testimonials.

na ceśvaraḥ tadbhedo vā pratyakṣādisiddhaḥ। tatpakṣe tu aikyāderapi mithyātvāt svarūpasya ca siddhatvāt vyarthaiva śrutiḥ। lakṣitasvarūpasyāpi na svarūpāt viśeṣaḥ। nirviśeṣatvokteḥ। mithyāviśeṣoktau ca aprāmāṇyaṃ śruteḥ। mithyātvaṃ ca mithyaiva teṣām। ataḥ satyatvaṃ satyaṃ syāt ca।

Perhaps (as per non-dualist), direct perception neither proves God nor his identity as distinct. With that assumption, as per non-dualist, the reality is false, an illusion. It renders the Vedic statements useless. Non-dualists must consider the perceived form (of God) as not special and not distinct from its natural form. It ends up advocating non-speciality (to God). This falsifies the Vedic statements that advocate speciality. then, Vedic statements lose significance as a valid source of knowledge. Hence, the illusionary nature of reality is false. The reality of the world is the truth and shall remain so.

The non-dualistic hypothesis cannot explain how illusion arises again and again from the blissful defect free Brahman.

upādhikṛtabhede pi upādheḥ mithyātve tu aprāptameva upādhibhedaṃ prāpayitvā punaḥ niṣiddhyate iti sa eva doṣaḥ। satyopādhipakṣepi hastapādādyupādhibhedepi bhokatuḥ ekatvadṛṣṭeḥ ekenaiva īśvareṇa sarvopādhigataṃ sukhaṃ duḥkhaṃ bhujyetetyevamādayo doṣāḥ samā eva।

If variance and distinct identities (in the world) are created because of illusion, appearance being false, and resulting from ignorance, it is forbidden to obtain a distinct appearance again and again (as ignorance cannot be born from knowledge). This is the defect in the argument. Even if we consider the appearance to be real (a form of God), then one must see the vision of the same god, non-duality, in the different appearances of the hand and legs of the enjoyer. The enjoyer not only experiences pleasure but also misery in all its appearing forms. This attaches defect (to the Lord).

acetanānāmanubhavābhāvāt na tatsāmyam। ato jīveśvarayoḥ bheda eveti siddham ॥ 18 ॥

Because non-conscious beings, insentient, lack experience, they cannot be equated (to individual beings). Thus, it is established that there is a difference between the individual being and the Supreme Lord.