B.G 2.18
antavanta imē dēhā nityasyōktāḥ"śarīriṇaḥ । anāśinōpramēyasya tasmād yuddhyasva bhārata ॥18॥
These bodies have an end and are perishable, while they say the embodied beings, Jīva, are eternal, having a form similar to the Immeasurable One who is without destruction. Therefore, O Bharata, fight!
Gīta Bhāshya 2.18
Only Jīva can be addressed with the word 'śarīriṇaḥ', because only Jīva has a destroyable body.
bhavatu dēhasyāpi kasyacinnityatvamiti। nētyāha–antavanta iti। astu tarhi darpaṇanāśāt pratibimbanāśavadātmanāśa ityata āha–nityasyēti। ‘śarīriṇaḥ’ iti īśvaravyāvr̥ttayē। naca naimittikanāśa ityāha– anāśina iti। kutaḥ? apramēyēśvarasarūpatvāt। nahyupādhibimbasannidhyanāśē pratibimbanāśaḥ, sati ca pradarśakē। svayamēvātra pradarśakaḥ। cittvāt। nityaścōpādhiḥ kaścidasti॥
If someone doubts if the soul's body is also eternal, the verse 'antavanta', i.e. the one with the end, denies the same. The destruction of the mirror destroys the reflection. Similarly, if we doubt the destruction of the Soul, the word ‘nityasya’, i.e. eternal, rejects the same. The verse 'antavanta' excludes the divine God by using the word 'sharirina', i.e. one who resides in the body. The word 'anashina' shows there is no destruction for the causal body of the Lord. Why? Immeasurable lordship by his very nature is without limits. Common knowledge suggests that the destruction of the reflection does not destroy the source image. Consciousness activities show the self to be spiritual. The individual soul is the reflection of the eternal Super-soul, which certainly exists.
‘pratipattau vimōkṣasya nityōpādhyā svarūpayā। cidrūpayā yutō jīvaḥ kēśavapratibimbakaḥ।’ iti bhagavadvacanāt ॥18॥
"Even after obtaining liberation, the individual being will ever remain an imitation of God (upādhi) in its essence. The individual being having got the liberated form will remain a reflected image of Lord Kēshava"–thus states 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.
śarīriṇāṁ tu dēhahānyādinā nāśō vidyatē ēva। 'yēna sarvamidaṁ tatam' iti tasyaiva lakṣaṇakathanāt na jīvānāṁ dēśataḥ guṇataśca pū'ṇatā। anicchayā da'hānyādērēva duḥkhāvāptiḥ siddhā। tasmādanāśinō apramēyasya viṣṇōḥ pūjārthaṁ yuddhyasva। tatprasādādhīnatvād duḥkhanivr̥ttēḥ sukhasya ca।
Those with a body certainly experience its destruction because of killing and other factors. The verse 2.17 describes the characteristics of God alone by stating 'by which all this exists'. Because individual souls are incomplete concerning space and quality. Despite not wanting it, individual souls still experience misery. This is consequent to their getting body and because of its subsequent destruction. Therefore, fight the war as the worship of Lord Vishnu, who is indestructible and immeasurable. By His grace alone, one gets freedom from misery and also happiness.
'yē tu sarvāṇi karmāṇi mayi saṁnyasya matparāḥ। tēṣāmahaṁ samuddhartā' (gītā 12-6) ityādēḥ।
"I uplift those who perform actions after giving up all attachments and who are devoted to me."–stated in Bhagavad Gita 12.6
jīvapakṣē 'nityasyōktāḥ' ityuktatvāt 'anāśinaḥ' iti punaruktiḥ। 'avināśi, yēna sarvamidaṁ tatam' ityuktasyaiva 'anāśinōpramēyasya' iti pratyabhijñānācca।
In the verse 2.18, if the everlasting quality is being attributed to the individual soul, the indestructible quality becomes a repetition. Thus, the properties of indestructibility stated in 2.17 for 'all this', and indestructible and immeasurable properties stated in 2.18 are to be recognized (with God).
'imē dēhāḥ' iti viśēṣaṇānnityaścidānandātmakaḥ svarūpabhūtō dēhō muktānāmapi vidyata iti jñāyatē।
While stating 'ime dehahah' i.e. 'in this body' in the verse 2.18, the destructibility is the speciality of the physical body. From this it becomes apparent, the body of liberated individuals is of the form of a blissful spirit, the essence of being.
"na vartatē yatra rajastamastayōḥ satvaṁ ca miśraṁ na ca kālavikramaḥ। na yatra māyā kimutāparē harē- ranuvratā yatra surāsurārcitāḥ॥ śyāmāvadātāḥ śatapatralōcanāḥ piśaṅgavastrāḥ surucaḥ supēśasaḥ। sarvē caturbāhava unmiṣanmaṇi - pravēkaniṣkābharaṇāḥ suvarcasaḥ॥ pravālavaiḍūryamr̥ṇālavarcasāṁ parisphuratkuṇḍalamaulimālinām। bhrājiṣṇubhiryaḥ paritō virājatē lasadvimānāvalibhirmahātmanām॥ vidyōtamānapramadōttamābhiḥ savidyudabhrāvalibhiryathā nabhaḥ"॥ iti hi bhāgavatē।
"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."–states Bhagavata.
cidānandaśarīrēṇa sarvē muktā yathā hariḥ। bhuñjatē kāmatō bhōgāṁstadantarbahirēva ca॥ iti paramaśrutiḥ।
"All the liberated beings, similar to Lord Hari, having blissful joy as the body enjoys and partakes with lust both inside and outside."–states Parama Sruti.
na ca jīvēśvaraikyaṁ muktāvapi।
These do not show the union of an individual being with God even after liberation.
'idaṁ jñānamupāśritya mama sādharmyamāgatāḥ। sargēpi nōpajāyantē pralayē na vyathanti ca'। (gītā, 14-2)
"Having resorted to this knowledge and secured a form like mine, they are not born even at the time of creation, nor suffer pain at the time of dissolution of the world."–Bhagavad Gita 14.2
'yō vēda nihitaṁ guhāyāṁ paramē vyōman। sōśnutē sarvānkāmānsaha brahmaṇā vipaścitā'।
"The one who knows and understands the Super soul in the cave of the heart stays with the all-knowing Brahman and enjoys all pleasures."
ētamānandamayamātmānamupasaṅkramya। imān lōkān kāmānnī kāmarūpyanusañjaran। ētatsāmagāyannāstē'
"The liberated beings, having got the blissful super soul enjoys all their desires, assume forms they want, dwell as they wish in various worlds, and sing happily the sāman–'hā vuhā vuhā'!."
'sarvē nandanti yaśasāgatēna sabhāsāhēna sakhyā sakhāyaḥ। kilbiṣaspr̥tpituṣaṇirhyēṣāmaraṁ hitō bhavati vājināya'।
"Liberated who will be mutual friends will always be satisfied with their friendly Lord, who governs the assembly. He takes care of their wellbeing without injustice and provides them with agreeable food."
"r̥cāṁ tvaḥ pōṣamāstē pupuṣvān gāyatraṁ tvō gāyati śakvarīṣu। brahmā tvō vadati jātavidyāṁ yajñasya mātrāṁ 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”.
"paraṁ jyōtirupasampadya svēna rūpēṇābhiniṣpadyatē sa tatra paryēti jakṣan krīḍan ramamāṇaḥ। strībhirvā yānairvā … । tadā vidvānpuṇyapāpē vidhūya nirañjanaḥ paramaṁ sāmyamupaiti।"
"Attaining the super effulgent form, he experiences the true self. 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 paraṁ viṣṇuṁ taddēhaṁ saṁśritā api। tāratamyēna tiṣṭhanti guṇairānandapūrvakaiḥ"॥
"The liberated obtain the supreme lord Vishnu. Though supported by his body, they live following their natural hierarchy based on qualities and bliss."
bhūpā manuṣyagandharvā dēvāḥ pitara ēva ca। ājānēyāḥ karmadēvāstattva(rūpāḥ)dēvāḥ purandaraḥ॥ śivō viriñcirityētē kramācchataguṇōttarāḥ । muktāvapi tadanyē yē bhūpācchataguṇāvarāḥ॥ na samō brahmaṇaḥ kaścinmuktāvapi kathañcana । tataḥ sahasraguṇitā śrīstataḥ paramō hariḥ॥ anantaguṇitatvēna tatsamaḥ paramōpi na।
"Kings, Gandharvas, gods, ancestral gods, action-gods, principle-gods, Indra, god Rudra, and the creator Brahma are hundred-fold superior each in order, respectively. The humans who differ from these are a hundredfold lower compared to Kings. Even in Mokha, none will be equal to lord Brahma. Thousand times superior to Him is goddess Shri. Infinitely superior to her is Lord Hari. None can equal or surpass Him."
akṣaṇvantaḥ karṇavantaḥ sakhāyō manōjavēṣvasamā babhūvuḥ। ādaghnāsa upakakṣāsa u tvē hradā iva snātvā u tvē dadr̥śrē। kāmasya yatrāptāḥ kāmāstatra māmamr̥taṁ kr̥dhīndrāyēndrō parisrava॥
"The liberated use fully the utility of eyes, ears, and other senses without any conflict and know according to their capacity”. “Give us the liberation in such worlds where all our wishes are fulfilled”.
ityādi mōkṣānantaramapi bhēdavacanēbhyaḥ।
These statements clearly show the difference between liberated and the God even after liberation.
'yatra tvasya sarvamātmaivābhūttatkēna kaṁ paśyēt'। 'yadvai tanna paśyati paśyanvai tanna paśyati'। 'na hi draṣṭurdr̥ṣṭērviparilōpō vidyatē'। 'avināśitvānna tu taddvitīyamasti । tatōnyadvibhaktaṁ yatpaśyēt'।
"In liberation, when everything will be of the essence, the atman; who should see? What can we see? The person in a deep sleep sees nothing, even though he knows his essence. Here, it does not indicate a defect to his knowledge of existence, because he is without destruction (avinashi). In deep sleep, there are no objects different from himself."
'paramaṁ brahma vēda brahmaiva bhavati'। 'tat tvamasi' । 'ahaṁ brahmāsmi'
“The one who knows the Ultimate Brahman becomes brahman.” “Oh Shwetaketu,you are that!” “My existence is that of Brahman.”
na ca ityādivākyavirōdhaḥ।
The above statements do not oppose the earlier quoted testimonials.
sañjñānāśō yadi bhavētkimuktyā naḥ prayōjanam। mōhaṁ māṁ prāpayāmāsa bhavānatrēti cōditaḥ॥ yājñavalkyaḥ priyāmāha nāhaṁ mōhaṁ bravīmi tē। bhūtajajñānalōpaḥ syānnijaṁ jñānaṁ na lupyatē॥ na ca jñēyavināśaḥ syādātmanāśaḥ kutaḥ punaḥ॥
[The conversation between Yajnavalkya and Maitreyi in Brihadaranyaka Upanishad is clarified] Maitreyi objects to Yajnavalkya's teaching saying–"What is the use of liberation if liberated are going to experience the destruction of their knowledge, because of which they cannot differentiate?" Then Yajnavalkya clarifies–"I have not misled you. The liberated will not have action-oriented becoming-knowledge (bhūtaja-jnāna), but they will continue to have existential-being-knowledge (nija-jnāna). Will destruction of existential knowledge not lead to destruction of the atman itself? How can that be?"
vabhāvataḥ parādviṣṇōrviśvaṁ bhinnamapi sphuṭam। asvātantryādbhinnamiva sthitamēva yadēdr̥śam॥ tadā ghrāṇādibhōgaḥ syātsvarūpajñānaśaktitaḥ। tadātmānubhavōpi syādīśvarajñānamēva ca॥ yadānyaṁ na vijānāti nātmānaṁ nēśvaraṁ tathā। puruṣārthatā kutastu syāttadabhāvāya kō yatēt॥ tasmātsvabhāvajñānēna bhinnā viṣṇusamīpagāḥ। bhuñjatē sarvabhōgāṁśca muktirēṣā na cānyathā॥
We can grasp that the universe is naturally different from the transcendental Vishnu. Though the universe is different, it has no independent existence. So, it is possible to smell and experience through senses alone, because of which we can know one's being. By experiencing one's atman, the essence, one can know the God, Īshwara. Otherwise, it is not possible to know either atman or Īshwara. What is the use of such a hypothetical liberated state (without knowledge of atman or Īshawara)? How can it be the ultimate goal of the human pursuit (purushartha)? Therefore, by the knowledge of their essence liberated will be distinct, but near to lord Vishnu. They enjoy all pleasures, not the other way.
yanna paśyēt parō viṣṇuḥ dvitīyatvēna sa svataḥ। taddvitīyaṁ na bhavati prādurbhāvātmakaṁ vapuḥ॥ pradhānapuruṣādanyat yattasmāt bhinnamīśvaraḥ। vibhaktatvēna niyataṁ yasmāt paśyati sarvadā। paśyannēva yatō viṣṇuḥ tadabhēdaṁ na paśyati। cētanācētanasyāsya nābhēdōsti tatōmunā। na hi jñānavilōpōsti sarvajñasya parēśituḥ॥
That which the supreme 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. The knowledge of the omniscient Lord can't get distorted.
brahmāṇi jīvāḥ sarvēpi parabrahmāṇi muktigāḥ। prakr̥tiḥ paramaṁ brahma paramaṁ mahadacyutaḥ॥ naiva muktā na prakr̥tiḥ kvāpi hi brahmavaibhavam। prāpnuvantyapi tajjñānānnijaṁ brahmatvamāpyatē॥ yadyasya paramēśatvaṁ tadā syādduḥkhitā kutaḥ। duḥkhī cētkuta īśatvamanīśō hyēva duḥkhabhāk॥ kutaḥ sarvavidōjñatvaṁ kva bhramōpyajñatāṁ vinā। tasmānnaivēśvarō jīvastatprasādāttu mucyatē॥
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.
ahēyatvadahaṁnāmā bhagavānhariravyayaḥ। brahmāsau guṇapūrṇatvāt asmi asau asanānmitēḥ। asanādasināmāsau tējastvāt tvamitīritaḥ। sarvaiḥ kriyāpadaiścaiva sarvēḥ dravyapadairapi। sarvaiḥ guṇapadaiścaiva vācya ēkō hariḥ svayam। yuṣmatpadaiḥ prātiyōgyāt tadyutaiśca kriyāpadaiḥ। asmatpadairāntaratvāt kriyārthaiśca tadanvayaiḥ। parōkṣatvāttatpadaiśca mukhyavācyaḥ sa ēva 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.
sarvān vēdānadhītyaiva prajñādhikyēna hētunā। śvētakēturahaṅkārāt prāyaśō nāsmi mānuṣaḥ॥ dēvō vā kēśavāṁśō vā naiṣā prajñānyathā bhavēt। ēvaṁ mahattvabuddhyaiva darpapūrṇōbhyagāt pituḥ॥ sakāśamakr̥tācāraṁ taṁ dr̥ṣṭvā stabdhamajñavat। pitōvāca kutaḥ putra stabdhatā tvāmupāgatā॥ prāyō nārāyaṇaṁ dēvaṁ naiva tvaṁ pr̥ṣṭavānasi। yasmin jñātē tu avijñātajñānādīnāṁ phalaṁ bhavēt॥ prādhānyāt sadr̥śatvācca tadadhīnamiti sphuṭam। tatsr̥ṣṭaṁ cēti vijñātaṁ phalavadidha bhavējjagat। svātantryēṇāsya vijñānaṁ mithyājñānamanarthakr̥t॥
[Clarification is provided regarding 'tatvamasi' statement from Upanishad.] Shvetaketu, having studied all the Vedas, being proud of his intelligence, with a false ego, started thinking after all he may not be human. “I must be a Deva or part of God! Else, how can I be so intelligent?” Thinking so, proud of his intelligence, with arrogance, he came to see his father. 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. 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 caivaikamr̥tpiṇḍa jñānādēḥ sadr̥śatvataḥ। mr̥ṇmayaṁ tadakāryaṁ ca jñātaṁ mr̥diti vai bhavēt। yathaiva mr̥ttikētyādinityanāmapravēdanāt। vācārabdhamanityaṁ tu jñātaṁ tanmūlamityapi। ēvaṁ kāraṇabhūtōsau bhagavān puruṣōttamaḥ। pradhānaśca svatantraśca tanmūlamakhilaṁ jagat। tadādhāraṁ vimuktau ca tadadhīnaṁ sadā sthitam। sa sūkṣmō vyāpakaḥ pūrṇaḥ tadīyamakhilaṁ jagat । tasmāt tadīyaḥ tvamasi naiva sōsi kathañcana।
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', we come to know the meaning of non-eternal, derived words meaning as well. 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. They depend on Him, and they are stationed in Him. He is subtle, all-pervading, and complete, and from Him is the entire universe. Therefore, you are His and can never become Him.
yathā pakṣī ca sūtraṁ ca nānā vr̥kṣarasā api। yathā nadyaḥ samudraśca yathā vr̥kṣaparāvapi। yathā dhānāḥ paraścaiva yathaiva lavaṇōdakē। yathā puruṣadēśau ca yathājñajñānadāvapi। yathā stēnāpahāryau ca tathā tvaṁ ca parastathā। bhinnau svabhāvatō nityaṁ nānayōrēkatā kvacit। ēvaṁ bhēdōkhilasyāpi svatantrāt paramēśvarāt। paratantraṁ svatantrēṇa kathamaikyamavāpnuyāt। sa jīvanāmā bhagavān prāṇadhāraṇahētutaḥ। upacārēṇa jīvākhyā saṁsāriṇi nigadyatē। tadadhīnamidaṁ sarvaṁ nānyādhīnaḥ sa īśvaraḥ।
(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 and the country in which he dwells, between an ignorant person and the giver of knowledge; As between the robber and the stolen object, between you and the other; In the above said examples, there is always a difference between entities based on their very nature. There is never a union between them anywhere. Similarly, the entire universe differs from the independent supreme lord. How is it possible for the dependent to merge with the independent? 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.
jīvēśvarabhidā caiva jaḍēśvarabhidā tathā। jīvabhēdō mithaścaiva jaḍajīvabhidā tathā। jaḍabhēdō mithaścēti prapañcō bhēdapañcakaḥ। viṣṇōḥ prajñāmitaṁ yasmāt dvaitaṁ na bhrāntikalpitam। advaitaḥ paramārthōsau bhagavān viṣṇuravyayaḥ। paramatvaṁ svatantratvaṁ sarvaśaktitvamēva ca। sarvajñatvaṁ parānandaḥ sarvasya tadadhīnatā। ityādayō guṇā viṣṇōḥ naivānyasya kathañcana। abhāvaḥ paramadvaitē santyēva hyaparāṇi tu। vikalpō vinivartēta kalpitō yadi kēnacit। advaitaṁ jñānināṁ pakṣē na tasmāt vidyatē kvacit। ityādiśrutibhyaḥ arthāntarasyaiva avagatatvāt।
The difference between the being and the supreme lord, the difference between the insentient and the supreme lord, the difference between the beings, the difference between the insentient and the beings, and the difference between various insentient - are the five types of eternal differences with which the world called 'pra-pancha' (literally to mean five-fold difference) comprises. 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, omnipotence, omniscience, and transcendental bliss, and all are under his control. All these qualities are in Lord Vishnu and can never reside at once in others. 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. Non-duality is not on the side of the wise, therefore, it is not exhibited anywhere. Thus, from these Vedic sentences, the difference only can be deciphered.
ēkapiṇḍanāmadhēyētiśabdānāṁ vaiyarthyaṁ cānyathā। na ca ēkavijñānēna sarvavijñānaṁ tatpakṣē। na hi śuktijñō rajatajña iti vyavahāraḥ। navakr̥tvōpi bhēdē ēva dr̥ṣṭāntōktēśca। tasmādatattvamasītyēvōcyatē।
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 different" in the Upanishad.
Note: The Upanishad statement "सर्वं तत्सत्यं स आत्मातत्त्वमसि श्वेतकेतो(6.9.4) as per Madhav needs to be split as "सर्वं तत्सत्यं स आत्म अतत्त्वमसि श्वेतकेतो”
aitadātmyamityētadātmasambandhi, tatsvāmikam। tvamapi tadaitadātma mēvāsi na sōsīti vā। taditi liṅgasāmyaṁ cātra। avidyamānamēva īśvaraṁ sr̥ṣṭyādikaṁ ca aprāptamēva ātmanō bhinnatvēna prāpayitvā tanniṣēdhē kathaṁ śrutēḥ unmattavākyatvaṁ na syāt? anuvādōpi 'yadidaṁ vadanti tanna yujyatē'ityādivākyaṁ parihārē viśēṣayuktiṁ ca vinā na dr̥ṣṭaḥ। atiprasaṅgaścānyathā। abhēdānuvādēna bhēdōpadēśaḥ kimiti na syāt?
This does not conflict with the previous phrase "एषोऽणिम् ऐतदात्म्यमिदं सर्वं", as it only indicates everything is related to "atman" and is owned by Him. So, the entire sentence means "You are having the all-pervading 'atman' 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. 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?
sarvaśākhāntē bhēdōktēśca ētadēva yuktam।
In the concluding remarks, all branches of knowledge advocated the distinct identity only. So, it is prudent to interpret accordingly.
"na asaṁvatsaravāsinē prabra"yāt na apravaktrē 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 bhuvanamabhyabhavām"
"I transcend the universe and am far superior in quality."
"anantē svargē lōkē jyēyē pratitiṣṭhati pratitiṣṭhati iti brahmavidō viduḥ"
"In the infinite heavenly world, in the victory, He is stationed, He is stationed" - thus conclude those who have realised Brahman.
"namō viṣṇavē mahatē karōmi"
"Offer my obeisances to Vishnu, the great!"
paśyantyātmanyavasthitam
"They see Him stationed in their heart."
ityādi॥
So, states various testimonials.
na cēśvaraḥ tadbhēdō vā pratyakṣādisiddhaḥ। tatpakṣē tu aikyādērapi mithyātvāt svarūpasya ca siddhatvāt vyarthaiva śrutiḥ। lakṣitasvarūpasyāpi na svarūpāt viśēṣaḥ। nirviśēṣatvōktēḥ। mithyāviśēṣōktau ca aprāmāṇyaṁ śrutēḥ। mithyātvaṁ ca mithyaiva tēṣām। ataḥ satyatvaṁ satyaṁ 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.
upādhikr̥tabhēdē pi upādhēḥ mithyātvē tu aprāptamēva upādhibhēdaṁ prāpayitvā punaḥ niṣiddhyatē iti sa ēva dōṣaḥ। satyōpādhipakṣēpi hastapādādyupādhibhēdēpi bhōkatuḥ ēkatvadr̥ṣṭēḥ ēkēnaiva īśvarēṇa sarvōpādhigataṁ sukhaṁ duḥkhaṁ bhujyētētyēvamādayō dōṣāḥ samā ēva। acētanānāmanubhavābhāvāt na tatsāmyam। atō jīvēśvarayōḥ bhēda ēvēti siddham ॥ 18 ॥
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 must have been 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). It is not equivalent to the insentient's absence of experiencing. Hence, it is proved that there is a difference between the Lord and living beings.
