Anne Frank. Beauty x Misery

I don’t think of all the misery, but of the beauty that still remains.”

A

Brahman, being

non-dual, there is no second entity that It can know. Even if It is taken as the

knower, since It is all pervading (sarvagatah), divisionless (nirvikalpa) and

changeless (nirvikara), Brahma caitanyam cannot arise as one flash after another

to focus on or pervade one particular object to become a particular configuration

after another corresponding to the particular objects. Division and differentiation

in the form of a separate reflected consciousness in each antahkarana – multiple

secondary consciousnesses as abhasa vada would have it - or conditioning by the

individual intellects as avacceda vada would have it or the false notion of reflection

in the multiple modes of Maya, the intellects, as pratibimba vada would have it, is

necessary for multiple knower –consciousnesses to be formed. Since my knower-

consciousness is confined to my intellect and yours to you, I do not know what you

are thinking and you do not know what I am thinking.

A

Kathopanishad I.ii.21 - ―Remaining stationary, It goes far; while sleeping, It goes

everywhere.‖ Sankaracarya explains that in sushupti, the differentiated consciousness

of the knowing instruments is dormant and the undifferentiated original consciousness

the atma is there seems to go everywhere. In the state when the differentiated knower-

consciousness is active, the atma, though by Its own nature is motionless (being all-

pervading) seems to travel far in accordance with the movement of its upadhi (the

mind).‖Kathopanishad I.ii.20 - ―Atma is the subtler than the subtlest and greater than

the greatest‖ (―anoraniiyaan mahatomahiiiyan)‖. Sankaracarya explains that the

contradiction can be resolved if we take the substratum. As the substratum of

everything, atma (Brahman) is the substratum of the greatest as well as the tiniest.

Whether it is a mountain nama roopa or a microbe nama roopa, atma is the Existence.

Brahman as Existence-Consciousness-Infinity is of a higher order of reality than the

nama roopa. In this way, also, Brahman can be said to be greater than the greatest.

Similarly, in terms of formlesslessness and unobjectifiability, Brahman can be said to

be subtler than the subtest. Sankaracarya‘s commentary – ―Whatever great or atomic

thing there is in the world, its substance (aatmatvam) is the eternal atma. Without

atma, they become non-existent. The very atma is subtler than the subtle and greater

than the great, because It is conditioned by all names, forms and activities which are its

limiting adjuncts; i.e. And that atma exists as the atma in the heart of all beings

beginning with brahmaa and ending with a clump of grass.‖

A