Truth About Dharma, Moksha and Guru

I welcome you all with My love and respects. I wanted all of you to know the second sutra I chanted, second 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 and bhashya. Vyasa is sutrakara, badarayana vyasa, Shankara is bhashyakara - commentator. I bow down to both of them again and again. Because today, the sutra which we are going to discuss today is a very important concept; very subtle concept, almost impossible to grasp.

And I want to tell you honestly, today noon, when I was resting, before, usually before entering samadhi; noon, I just rest for some time. Before I enter into samadhi, I just see this sutra and literally the downloading happens. Whole night, sorry the whole resting time in the samadhi, the revelation about this sutra happens. I read this sutra, today’s sutra and I was resting. I couldn't catch how to present it, how to exactly put in right words and present it. Suddenly, please understand, it’s mystical but truth. Suddenly I saw, kind of a two intense thought flow argument, flow for this sutra, just hit My inner space. Two 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 almost ‘juice’ of My inner space. I just looked up and saw how these two thought flows are happening in Me. I saw, it’s Akashic record of Shankara and Vyasa’s arguments.

Today, I am going to tell you exactly what Shankara and Vyasa argued on this sutra... I can actually repeat the whole thing in Sanskrit; because you guys will not be able to understand, I’ll repeat in English, exactly the argument style and structure which Vyasa and Shankara had when they argued. I do not know whether there is any book exists. As on now I have not read any book. But, I’ll express today whatever got downloaded in Me.

If there is any book you can find out and verify! I challenge, It’ll be verbatim. It’ll be verbatim! Because I saw very clearly the argument flow of Vyasa, an argument flow of Shankara, both landing. All of you should be aware that Vyasa himself came down to check Shankara’s strength on this philosophy and to bless Shankara. The argument went on and on and on! How can it end? And who can win between Shankara and Vyasa? That’s why Bhatmapada sings great songs, great verse, saying, Shiva is sitting here as Shankara, and Vishnu here as Vyasa, how can this argument end? I bow down to both of you! Suddenly Shankara realizes ‘Oh, it’s Vyasa sitting in front.’ And, Vyasa realized Shankara who is sitting in front. Then both of them end the argument. Vyasa blesses Shankara saying that I’ll give you sixteen more years of life. So, he blesses Shankara and leaves.

So exactly what was that argument flow? Today I have; I’ll present to you guys. Let Me enter into the sutra. Very sweet thought flow, because in this argument, nobody is trying to convince other. Like a chatting over the cup of coffee, that is the way the whole thought flow was. Shankara had some deeper understanding, and Vyasa had deeper understanding. Then Shankara goes to the next level of understanding, and Vyasa goes to the next level of understanding. It goes on and on and on, there is no argument and nobody is agreeing with each other, that is the most funny thing. I’ll present to you, you will be shocked. How can this kind of argument go on? Neither both of them disagreeing with each other, nor they’re agreeing with each other. ‘Tat hetu vyapa desa cha.’ I’ll directly give you guys the Akashic records, the Cosmic reading - Akashic record of Shankara and Vyasa. ‘Tat hetu vyapa desa cha’... I cannot find a single translation which even connects with Shankara and Badryana’s thought flow… Let Me read, Tat hetu vyapa desa cha.

In the first chapter, first section, sutra number fourteen… 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 affect of the bliss, how can it have some other quality than bliss? But by this 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 complete, factual cognition. As the bliss and the abundance cannot be separated by its existence and action. Vyasa starts the action and inaction, both penetrates certain personality existence. 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 Vyasa 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 different, other than Moksha’s very existence, it is a line moving in the love, in the loke, 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’ve clearly just clearly repeated the flow as it landed in Me, now I’ll comment on it. It’s a exact flow; The Shankara’s flow, as the being and doing expresses and intensifies the flow of the original existence, being and doing consists of the original source. Vyasa’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; as the Shankara’s flow, as the Moksha 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 different, 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 kama- pleasure. When being and doing is completely overtakes the other, it is called Dharma or Moksha. So because all the four flows with the very source on the very source, even though all the four are considered to be different, it cannot be different, as the source and the flow is one and the same, like water and the river.

Shankara flows whether water and the river flows or stays as the source and flow. It can difference, 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 Moksha which does not directly useful to the common man, can never become Dharma. The words go on denoting the same. But the very flow differs, based on the time and space and requirement, which is the influence of Maya. So, you cannot say the Maya and Brahman does not have any gap.

Vyasa starts; 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 the Maya into Brahman and Brahman into Maya has no boundary which can be experienced by the Upanishads or the ‘inner space’ of your very experience as per the Atma, Apta, Shastra Pramana. The differences are never felt except by the different usage of the word; you cannot grasp the Brahman, Maya’s independent existence, or even a slight difference.

Then comes the Shakara’s flow, Shankara’s 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 sake of other at a particular point. Dharma has to be dropped for Moksha. If you are interested too much in Dharma, Moksha cannot be achieved. This is the revelation not only of Shastras and Atma-pramana, the personal experience. Then comes Vyasa. There is a space where the Dharma and Moksha cannot be dropped for the sake of another, as enlightenment or Atmanubhava is always transmitted only by a personality, where the Moksha and Dharma has met one another, merging into that completely.

So, the transmission happens only by a being in which both are merged. You don’t need to drop one another when you have a direct Master who is transmitting that experience; after all it never gets transmitted without the personality, where the Moksha and Dharma has never become one has never become merged; so, the necessity to drop Dharma for Moksha or drop Moksha for Dharma, does not exist with the real transmission with the real transmission is happening.

I saw very clearly, when the last argument was put, because it touched the Guru sentiment, Shankara fell into the reminiscent mood of Govindapada and did not present any argument, that’s where it ended. Just he fell into that loving mood of cared by Govindapada. So he did not continue the further arguments on this sutra. The further exploration did not happen, it just stopped with it.