Aparokshanubhuti-18

Verse 41

Now, a doubt is raised:

Isn’t the assertion that the Self is different from the two bodies (gross and subtle) pointless?

Because by distinguishing between the Self and body in this way — as was done previously — one ends up affirming the reality of the world (prapañca) just like the logical schools (e.g., Nyāya) do.

But then, if the world is accepted as real, what is the value of human pursuit (puruṣārtha) in the spiritual sense? It becomes inferior, because the removal of fear — the fundamental spiritual goal — is not achieved.

This is supported by the scriptural statement:

“From the second alone arises fear.”

(Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 1.4.2)

Hence, unless duality is transcended, the liberating knowledge remains incomplete or ineffective.

Verse 42

Because the knowledge of difference (duality) serves as a cause or preparatory step toward the knowledge of non-difference (nonduality), the discussion about the distinction between the Self and the body is not purposeless—thus the conclusion is stated.

Through the previous explanation, where the Self was distinguished from the body, the materialist view of the Cārvākas, which equates the body itself with the Self, was effectively refuted.

Now, through the subsequent portion of the text, it is clearly and explicitly established that:

• This bodily distinction (deha-bheda) is itself ultimately nonexistent,
• There is no reality apart from the existence of the Self,
• And such an understanding is indeed traditionally accepted and well-established in the Vedāntic tradition.

Verse 43

Thus, it is said regarding Consciousness—the Consciousness that is the substratum and the illuminator of the entire universe of beings and material objects.

Just as in statements like “the pot is seen,” “the cloth is seen,” etc., the perceiving Consciousness remains uniform and of one nature, therefore no real or essential difference (dualism) is valid in any circumstance. Such duality is not ultimately real.

Then someone might object: "If this is so, doesn't the individuality of jīvas (living beings) become real?" The reply is: This individuality—this 'jīvatva'—is also false (mithyā).

It is only due to the limiting adjuncts such as the mind and internal instruments, which are themselves products of Māyā, that this sense of individuality arises.

To illustrate the falsity of something projected upon a real substratum, the classic rope-snake example is given:

Just as an ignorant person, in dim light and due to the rope’s shape, mistakes a rope for a snake, but a knowledgeable person does not—

So too, due to ignorance of the Self and because of its luminous nature, the undiscerning person imagines a false identification (a knot) of consciousness with the non-conscious (chit–jaḍa-granthi), leading to the illusion of a false ego (chidābhāsa).

But this illusion does not arise for the one who has discernment.

This is the core secret (rahasya) of the Vedānta siddhānta—the teaching that only nondual Consciousness is real, and individuality is due to superimposition.