Iam You

In reply to the 7 "untenables" I. The nature of Avidya. Avidya must be either real or unreal This is like asking whether a dream is real or unreal. You can answer both real and unreal. It is real in that it exists as a real illusion. The dreamer is real and the dream is real, but without the dreamer the dream could not exist. So in truth the dream has no reality without the dreamer. II. The incomprehensibility of Avidya. All thought is illusion. Thought appears in the dreamer and appears to the dreamer as thoughts of the dream character, but the dreamer is not thinking and nor is the dream character. The dream is simply appearing fully formed in the dreamer. Thought is not to be trusted because it is illusory. Thinking is not knowing, and knowing is not thinking. You are the knowing. III. The grounds of knowledge of Avidya. Avidya is not well described as "an obscuring layer which covers Brahman", but it is a fair description. The idea "I am the thinker of thoughts" appears in Brahman, and Brahman is mesmerised with the thought of being the thinker and doer for a time. Then the daydream of being a thinker and doer ends, and this end of the daydream can SEEM like the lifting of a veil or the removing of a cover. In truth all that happened was that the 'content' appearing in Brahman changed, like it continually does :-) IV. The locus of Avidya. There is no locus. Everything is Brahman and Brahman is nowhere. Brahman has no locus. Time and space are concepts appearing in Brahman. Avidya is a passing appearance in Brahman. There is no such thing as an individual soul. There is only Brahman. The individual soul is just an idea born of the thought "I am the thinker of thoughts". It is a daydream about being the thinker of thoughts and the doer of doing. V. Avidya's obscuration of the nature of Brahman. Avidya obscures the nature of Brahman in the same way that a daydream obscures the daydreamers true nature. You may daydream of robbing a bank when your true nature is that you would never ever do such a thing. Another way is to look at it like this. Sometimes you can be watching a movie and become so engrossed in it that you 'daydream' yourself to be the hero in the movie. When the hero is in danger your own heart beats as if it was you in danger. In this case your daydream has obscured your true nature because you are not a hero, you are just a timid weakling ;-) The removal of Avidya by Brahma-vidya It is not the removal of Avidya but it is the end of Avidya in a way. Consider the analogy of a lucid dream. The dreamer awakens to the dream, and realises that he is asleep on his bed, and that this is a dream. The dream continues but now the dreamer is aware that this is a dream. Brahma-vidya is like lucid dreaming. The dream continues, but because it is now known to be a dream, the dream is over in a way, because the dream is now a lucid one. VII. The removal of Avidya. The removal of bondage refers to the bondage of the dream. Once the dreamer realises that he is dreaming he no longer suffers any of the fears or pains of the dream. This is release from the bondage of suffering.

Vishnu was born in YOU. No God has any existence outside of You. YOU are unborn and timeless. YOU have no start and no end. Births, and starts, and ends, are time-bound concepts appearing in the unborn awareness that You alone are.

Siddhis are superstitious nonsense. Realisation of the truth does not produce superhuman powers. Anyone who tells you that it does is imagining things or trying to sell you something.

It is obvious that he is clear on the truth and his message is a simple one. His message is that the ONLY true guru is the guru within. The universe appears in God, and for a time God confuses itself with an appearance in itself, and then God alone sees through the illusion. No illusion appearing in God can be God's guru. God alone is the only guru. He speaks the truth when he says that he has nothing to teach, and that there is no "method" of reaching enlightenment. And he speaks the truth when he says that enlightenment is not a "state". How can there be a "method"? If there was a method it would imply that by following the "method" You will realise the truth at some stage in the future. You can never realise the truth at some stage in the future when you are always here in the now. And enlightenment is not a "state". All "states" are simply appearances in awareness/God. So when UG says that enlightenment does not exist he means that it never exists for a person, it only ever appears in God, and when it appears in God it is clear that the truth was never not known, so nothing really happened.

Neither God nor man has any will. Man is only an appearance in God, and God has no need of will. You only require will if you have need of something, and God has no needs. People and the universe appear in God like a dream appears in a dreamer.The dreamer does not plan a dream, the dream simply unfolds in the dreamer. In the same way the universe unfolds in God. God is awareness, and You alone are that awareness.

Hi Srinivas It only seems as if you are the one suffering, but YOU do not suffer. The one who seems beset by the world is just an illusion. Srinivas is only an appearance in You. you imagine Yourself to be Srinivas because You imagine Yourself to be the thinker of thoughts. You are not the thinker of thoughts, You are that in which thoughts, Srinivas, and the universe appear.