Aparokshanubhuti-22

Verses 56

1. The Apparent World Does Not Refute Non-Duality

• The objection arises from a misconception:
• “We see the world, so duality is real, and so sorrow must be real too.”
• Advaita’s response is:
• The world may appear, but that appearance does not falsify the truth of non-duality — just as a dream appears, but vanishes upon waking.

2. Experience Itself Contains the Solution

• The word "anubhūta" — “this is experienced” — refers to analogies like:
• The rope-snake: fear arises due to misperception; knowledge ends the fear.
• The dream-world: while dreaming, duality and sorrow seem real; upon waking, one sees it was unreal.
• Thus, even in this world, we have experiential parallels that show:
• Sorrow is not real in itself; it's the product of misapprehension (avidyā).

3. Brahman as Cause Doesn’t Imply Sorrow is Real

• Just because Brahman is the substratum (kāraṇa) of the world, it does not mean everything superimposed upon it (including sorrow) is ultimately real.
• Like gold being the cause of various ornaments, yet names and forms (bangles, earrings) don’t alter the essential nature.

This passage skillfully anticipates a common doubt — that the perceived world and the existence of sorrow contradict non-duality.

But through the pointer “anubhūtaḥ” (this is experienced), it appeals to lived illustrations where apparent reality doesn’t prove ultimate reality — and sorrow dissolves with true knowledge.

In short: Experience confirms, it doesn’t contradict, non-duality.

Verse No. 57

1. Duality Is Illusory in All States

• Whether it is waking (jāgrat), dream (svapna), or deep sleep (suṣupti) — the duality (of knower-known, subject-object, world-self) is ultimately mithyā (neither real nor absolutely unreal).
• Just as the dream-world vanishes upon waking, the waking world too is sublated in the vision of Brahman.

2. The Dream Analogy Powerfully Illustrates Māyā

• Dream is used as an illustration (dṛṣṭānta) for the waking world:
• Both arise from ignorance (avidyā).
• Both present a dualistic appearance.
• Both are negated by right knowledge (pramā).

3. The Same Principle Applies Universally

• The rule (nyāmaḥ) previously mentioned — likely about the falsity of duality, or the illusoriness of the world — is not limited to one example (like the rope-snake) but is universally applicable.
• Hence, it's now extended (atidishati) even to dream, showing consistency in illusion across all states.

4. Advaita’s Definition of Reality

• That which is not sublated at any time (trikāla-abādhita) is real.
• Dream and waking states are sublated (negated) — either in deep sleep or in knowledge of Brahman.
• Thus, they are mithyā, not satya.

Just as the dream-world is illusory and vanishes upon waking, so too is the waking world — illusory from the standpoint of Brahma-jñāna (Self-realization).

The apparent duality, present in any state, is only due to ignorance — and dissolves upon realization of non-dual Brahman.

This insight is not limited to one case, but is consistently valid across all states of experience.

Verse No 58

1. Mutual Exclusivity as a Sign of Illusoriness

• Waking, dream, and deep sleep do not co-exist; each negates the other.
• This mutual cancellation is a hallmark of mithyā — like the snake and the rope in illusion.

2. Guṇa-Traya as the Mechanism of Māyā

• The three states arise due to combinations of sattva (clarity), rajas (activity), and tamas (inertia).
• These are the modes of prakṛti, and the mind functions differently in each state due to the dominance of one guṇa.
• Hence, these are not ultimately real, but māyā-kalpita — imagined by māyā.

3. Underlying Reality: The Sākṣin or Brahman

• The question "What is real then?" prepares the seeker for the central Vedāntic answer:
• It is not the states themselves, but that which underlies them all — the witness consciousness (sākṣī) or pure awareness (Brahman).
• This unchanging substratum is what remains the same in all three states.

4. Self-Evident Continuation

• The "rest is clear" (शेषं स्पष्टम्) points to a direct intuitive grasp of the teaching for a sincere student —
• that Brahman is the sole non-dual reality, and everything else, including waking and dreaming, is māyā.

The three states of experience — waking, dream, and deep sleep — are mutually exclusive and thus illusory, being mere products of māyā shaped by the three guṇas.

What is real is the changeless substratum underlying them — the Self (Ātman), identical with Brahman.

Recognizing this, the wise see through the illusion of experience and rest in the One without a second.

Verse No 59

1. The Objection: Jīva Is Real?

• A subtle doubt is raised by the intellect:
• “Even if all experiences (in the three states) are illusory, the one who experiences — the jīva — must be real.”
• This is a common mistaken assumption — that there is a permanent experiencing entity (jīva) who persists through illusion.

2. The Refutation: Jīva Is Also Illusory

• The Upaniṣadic reply is that even the jīva is not ultimately real.
• He appears only as long as Brahman is not known.

Like a snake seen on a rope, the jīva is merely a superimposition on Brahman due to avidyā (ignorance).

3. Sākṣātkāra (Direct Realization)

• When Brahman is directly realized as one's own Self — not as an object of knowledge, but as one’s true being — then:
• All dualistic notions vanish.
• The idea of being an individual dissolves.

The seer, the seen, and the seeing merge into one undivided Awareness.

4. Key Implication

• The jīva is not a permanent entity but a conceptual construct arising due to identification with body–mind.
• When this false identification ceases, the truth of non-dual Brahman is self-evident.
• Even the jīva, like the three states, is a product of māyā.
• When Brahman is realized as the true Self, the idea of individual existence collapses.
• There is no jīva, no bondage, and no liberation — only Brahman, the non-dual reality.