““Shankaram shankaraacharyam keshavam baadaraayanam.”

Prayer.

“Shankaram shankaraacharyam keshavam baadaraayanam. Sootram bhaashya krutau vande bhagavantau punah punaha!”

Welcome all devotees, disciples sitting with us around the world 398-164-23

I wanted all of you to know the 2nds sloka I chanted, that sloka means – Shankara - Shiva who came down as Shankaracharya, Keshava - Vishnu who came down as Vyasa – I bow down to both of them for creating sutra & bhaashya. Vyasa is sutrakara – Baadaraayana Vyaasa, Shankara is the bashyakaara – commentator. I Bow down to both of them again & again. Because today the sutra which I am going to discuss today is a very important concept. Very subtle concept almost impossible to grasp. I wanted to tell all of you that today when I read this sutra and resting in the noon, usually every afternoon I rest for sometime. Before going to samadhi, I read the sutra and I was resting. I could not catch how to present it. How to exactly put it in right words and present it. Suddenly, please understand it is mystical but the truth – suddenly I saw kind of a two intense thought flow, argument flow for this sutra just hit my inner space. 2 thought flow about this same sutra – how this sutra can be understood and debated in two thought flows. Just both of them hit my inner space and became juice of my inner space. I just looked up and saw how this 2 thought flows happened in me. I saw it is Aakashik records of Shankara and Vyasa’s arguments that happened in me! Today I can tell you exactly what Shankara & Vyaasa argued about this.

I will repeat exactly the argument style and structure which Vyasa & Shankara had when they argued. I don’t know if any book exists as on now, but I will express today whatever I downloaded in me. I will express to all of you. If there is any book, you can check. I challenge it will be verbatim. I saw very clearly the argument flow of Shankara & of Vyasa. All of you may be aware that Vyasa himself came down to check Shankara’s strength on this philosophy and bless Shankara. And the argument went on and on & on. How can either of them win and who can end this argument between Vyaasa and Shankara? That is when Padmapaada sings Shiva is sitting as Shankara and Vishnu as Vyasa who will win, I bow down to both of you! Then suddenly Shankara realizes it is Vishnu and Vyasa realized it is Shiva. So they ended the argument ☺Then both of them ended the argument and Vyaasa blesses Shankara with 16 more years of life. So exactly what argument flow they had, today I will present to all of you.

I welcome all the cities online - LA, Singapore, Ohio, Slim River Malaysia, Malaysia Ashram

It is a very sweet thought flow. Because in this argument nobody is trying to convince the other like chatting over a cup of coffee! Shankara adds deeper understanding and then Vyaasa then Shankara leads to deeper understanding and then Vyaasa leads to deeper understanding and they don’t agree or disagree with each other. I will present the argument. You will be shocked - Neither both of them disagree with each other, nor they agree with each other.

Let us enter into the sutra.

1st chapter, 1st section, 14th sutra –

tath hethu vyapa deshaacha!

I will directly give you guys the aakashik records, the cosmic reading of Shankara and Vyasa.

tath hethu vyapa deshaacha!

I cannot find a single translation which even connects with Shankara & Baadaraayana’s thought flow.

Shankara starts saying as the bliss is the cause, abundance is effect. The abundance can be considered as maya.

Vyasa replies if something can be effect of the bliss, how can it have some other quality than bliss? But by the word maya, a common perception can be something other than Brahman - cause.

Shankara continues: The attribution something other than Brahman is maya - itself is not the complete factual cognition as the bliss and the abundance cannot be separated by its existence and actions.

Vyaasa starts: The action and inaction both penetrates certain personality existent you cannot attribute the personality change during action or inaction.

Then Shankara continues: The action naturally expresses the intensity of the personality so you cannot say the inaction or the action can represent the same personality

Then Vyaasa continues- As dharma and moksha in inaction same personality is in moksha in action he shows the dharma. So action and inaction both exist in same space.

Then Shankara continues: even though action, inaction exhibits itself in a same space, dharma is surely one step diff other than moksha’s very existence. It is a line moving in the love, in the lok, in the flow, the very essence of the source even though it is love - the flow of the love is dharma. So the dharma and moksha cannot be, may not be equated for common understanding.

I have clearly just clearly repeated the flow as it landed on me, now I will comment on it. It is a exact flow. Now what we will make out of it? I have not changed a single word. I just repeated the flow as it is! ☺ I think still the thought flow is not completed. It is just oozing out. I will do one thing I will first record it. whatever comes out I will record it. Then I will comment on it. (gives a huge pause) God! ☺

Then Shankara’s flow – as the being and doing expresses and intensifies the flow of the Ooriginal (0) existence, being and doing consists of the original source.

Vyaasa’s flow – even though being and doing consists of the original flow, original flow is not just being and doing something more than the being and doing.

The Shankara’s flow- as the mokhsa when moves considered as dharma, the source dharma and moksha may not become equivalent. So we have to look into the subtle possible difference between maya and Brahman.

Vyasa flows – words like dharma, artha, kama moksha can be diff but the original flow the moksha when it vibrates in the being by the doing in a majority space it is called artha - the wealth. But when the doing is reduced by the push of the being it is called kaama - pleasure. When being and doing is completely overtakes the other, it is called dharma or moksha. So Because all the 4 flows with the very source, on the very source even though all the 4 are considered to be different, it cannot be diff as the source and flow is one and the same like water and river

Shankara flows - whether water and river flows or stays as the source and flow it can change by its very quality by the flow or by being stagnant as the dharma which does not constantly upgrade itself does not lead to moksha. So the mokhsa which does not directly useful to common man……can never become dharma the words differ go on denoting the same but the very flow differ by time, space and requirement which is the influence of maya so you cannot say the maya and Brahman does not have any gap.

Vyasa’s flow - if you accept the gap between the maya and Brahman which creates too many complications and questions which cannot be solved sorted out by any argument the flow of maya into Brahman and Brahman into maya has no boundary which can be experienced by the Upanishads or the experience of your very experience as per the atma the shaastra or pramana except by the different usages of the word you cannot grasp the Brahman, maya or their independent existence or even a slight difference

Shankara’s flow argument - if there is no difference between the Brahman and the maya’s flow if there is no addition or deletion between these two, then the dharma and moksha is supposed to be one and the same, how can dharma and moksha be one and the same as they have to be dropped for the other at a part point because at one point they have to be dropped for o dharma has to be dropped for mokha if you are interested in moksha dharma has to be dropped and if you are interested in dharma, moksha has to be dropped - this is a revelation of shaastra and apta pramaana

Vyaasa’s flow – there is a space where the dharma and moksha cannot be dropped for the sake of another as enlightenment or atmaanubhava is always transmitted only by personality where the dharma and moksha have met one another, merged into that completely so the transmission happens by a , so when the ….. being in which both are merged you don’t need to drop one or othe where a personality ….has never become one, has never become merged. So the necessity to drop the dharma for moksha or necessity to drop moksha for dharma does not exist when the real transmission is happening!

☺ How to translate? I can promise the whole thought flow is not mine! At least close disciples can find out my thought flow. My thought flow easily you can find out. I saw very clearly when the argument was put, because it landed on the Guru sentiment, Shankara fell into the reminiscent mood of Govindapaada and did not argue. Just he fell into the loving mood of Govindapaada so he did not continue on further arguments on this sutra. The further explorations did not happen. As it landed on the guru sentiment, where the Dharma & Moksha merges into one personality, the requirement for renouncing one for the other does not exist when the transmission is happening through the master. When you are living and following & flowing with the master you don’t need to renounce dharma for moksha and moksha for dharma. Because the idea you carry about Dharma is not Dharma at all. When there is a person – moksha sitting alive in front of you to describe dharma every moment to you, just go with it. You don’t need to even renounce what you may think. If you are just flowing with the master’s experience and flow and by his words and by himself along with him, you are not renouncing dharma, even if you renounce whatever you know about dharma, even the idea of dharma is taken away from you what you think as dharma because your very idea about dharma and moksha is completely different from what it is. If you flow with the master and his experience, you may not renounce dharma. Even those ideas are taken away from you and you are asked to do something opposite the very renunciation is happening in you as dharma itself is expressing itself completely through the person who is dharma and moksha himself. So with these words Shankara feel into deep love, Guru Bhakti. Shankara feel into the deep trust of his master and he just relaxed his argument. Because any argument Shankara would have presented would have been disrespect for his own Guru. So he rested.

I repeated the flow and now I will comment on it. It is the exact flow.

Flow is not mine, translation is mine. The flow, the trend was not mine. I translated exactly what Shankara and Vyasa argued each other.

I think all of us need to see the whole argument again!

In the last 8 years in so many 1000s of hours I spoke, I never spoke closing my eyes. Have any one of you seen me talking with closed eyes? Usually I can’t talk just to camera. That is the reason I always tell I will talk to people.

Let us watch the whole thing once more. (the whole conversation is played again)

Yes, come on, please start now. You should be in a space where you can never be praised. That is such a wonderful space where you can never be defamed. See how can you praise me for this? Being in a space where people cannot praise you at all is the safest safe space you cannot be defamed at all. Let me start one by one. I don’t know where to start where to end. Okay I will start one by one.

Did you see one revelation – when moksha and dharma overlaps on each other or pushes each other – the being and doing – if there is more being , less doing it is called pleasure, if there is more doing, less being it is called wealth - artha. Wow! The entire life science is over! And if completely being takes over moksha, if completely doing takes over dharma!

B zero D is moksha D zero B is dharma D higher than B is wealth B higher than D is pleasure!

The aphorisms of existence ! This is what is Brahmasutra! Understand aphorisms of existence! How you exist, how you can exist! I never realized in my life sitting and talking can be so tasty. I used to hear when people say people sit and talk for hours together. Sitting & talking is so tasty - some stories, rumors, gossiping. Gossiping can be so tasty I never felt. Now I am feeling the gossiping can be so tasty. Because this is more than a gospel, it is more like a gossiping only! It is more like a gossiping only! I can say it is not debate between Shankara & Vyasa – gossip between Shankara and Vyasa. I will dig out the sacred secrets from this sutra.

See as the cause is bliss effect is abundance. May be abundance can be considered as Maya - illusion. No. it is not. As the cause creates effect without any gap, without any reason and can never be separated as a innate experience and tendency, the cause is inbuilt with effect, bliss is inbuilt with abundance, abundance cannot be maya. Then finally whole thing boils down to whether dharma is important or moksha is important. Naturally everybody will say moksha only is important. Then why dharma and moksha are two different? Then it boils down to moksha can never be tasted unless a person in whom moksha and dharma has merged in your life transmits it to you. Dharma can never live in you unless a person in whom both become one teaches you. Moksha can never be tasted unless the guy in both have become one transmits to you. Same way dharma also cannot be in you till he transmits. When I use words and transmit it can become dharma, when I use energy is transmitted it can become moksha. But both are one and the same. It can be transmitted from a body in which both have become one, only that body can transmit even one to you. Because it has been transmitted by a body in which both have become one, you don’t need to renounce one for the sake of the other! If you catch his energy naturally you will go with his words. If you go with his words, naturally you will catch the energy. That’s all! I think today you guys cannot have a debate ☺ or do one thing Vyasa team transcribe the Vyaasa’s thought flow, Shankara’s team transcribe Shankara’s thought flow and both of you try to repeat the same arguments in your understanding. As per your understanding try to repeat the same arguments. Maybe you will have deeper understandings.

Understand, today I have not only given the sacred secret for debate, I have given the very thought flow for debate. Very thought flow for the debate is given. Very thought flow for the debate is already presented to you. You just intensify those words as you understand. I can give you this 3 sacred secret –

1. Is abundance and bliss different? 2. Is dharma and moksha different? 3. Is the master is the source of both?

You can honestly debate. Sometime you can say I understand master is moksha, but I don’t think he is dharma. Or you can say master is dharma not moksha, or he is neither or he is both and transmits only one – d & m, or you can say he is both and he transmits both. So you can debate, explore on – the sacred secret can be -

Is the source of dharma and moksha? Does he transmit both? * Who gets which? Or who receives which, who receives what? You can explore. You can debate.

Send me the result of your debate then I will further expand. Let Vyasa and Shankara bless all of us to understand their very thought flow. Let them bless us to experience their very energy flow, the ultimate Brahma Sutras the ultimate aphorisms of existence, the ultimate existence itself!

My Blessings to all of you sitting with us around the world at this moment in 768 places, in 249 cities, in 32 countries!