BSB 2.3.9
There is no possibility of origin of Brahman which is of the nature of Existence. It cannot originate from Existence for otherwise it leads to infinite regress. Moreover, there should be some distinguishing features for a causal relationship. Brahman cannot originate from non-existence (Ch 6.2.2). For creation, a primary origin-free material cause is to be admitted, and Brahman is the primary material cause.
BSB 2.3.16 to 2.3.18 There is a doubt whether individual soul has birth and death because it is generally said that Devadutt is born or Devadutt has died and purificatory rites following birth are enjoined. The sutras establish that birth and death in their primary sense refer to birth and death of body. It refers to individual soul in secondary sense because of association. “It is this body that dies when it is left by the soul, but the soul does not die” (Ch.6.11.3). “The individual being does not die” (Ch Up 6.11.3). “Let my manifest name and form by Myself entering as the individual soul” (Ch Up 6.3.2).
BSB 3.2.31, 3.2.32, 3.2.36 and 3.2.37
There is a controversy about the term, ‘embankment’ in Ch 8.4.1 where Self is compared to embankment. Embankment protects something meaning thereby that Self protects something different from itself which means duality. In Ch 8.4.2, ‘crossing over the embankment’ also suggests duality. It is established that comparison with embankment is due to similarity only as it should be in the case of any comparison. The view of duality is not appropriate. “Crossing over” is not in literal sense. It means attaining. As in the case of expression, “he has crossed over grammar” means “he has mastered grammar” and not gone beyond it.
In BSB 3.2.36 “Having thus set at naught all the reasons, like the use of terms like embankment that were advanced by the opponent, the aphorist now concludes by supporting his own position by another reason: “Similarly from the denial of everything else”, too, it is understood that there is nothing else superior to Brahman. There are texts, “It is He who exists below”(Ch.7.25.1), “It is the Self that is below” (Ch.7.25.2).
BSB 3.2.37 establishes omnipresence of Self on the authority of Upanishadic texts. “The Space (Brahman) within the heart is as extensive as the Space outside” (Ch.8.1.3), “He is omnipresent like space and eternal”, “He is greater than heaven” (Ch. 3.14.3)
BSB 3.3.27, 4.1.14 and 4.1.15 There is a doubt whether results of virtuous deeds are also destroyed on dawn of knowledge because virtuous deeds also arise from scriptures and therefore not in conflict with knowledge. it is clarified that results of virtuous deeds are also destroyed. The (past) virtues and vices get destroyed which have not begun to bear fruit. There is doubt regarding the text, “He lingers so long only as he is not freed from the body; then he becomes free” (Ch. 6.14.2). The opponent holds that liberation is put off till the fall of the body and not immediately after gaining knowledge. The matter is clarified as follows.
“The knowledge does not arise without the help of some residual results of actions that have begun to bear fruit. As knowledge is based on that medium (viz the body produced by the residual results), the knowledge has to wait for its result till the acquired momentum of those medium exhausts itself out as in the case of a wheel of a potter; for there is nothing to stop it in the intervening period. As for the knowledge of the Self as the non-performer of any act, it destroys the results of works by first sublating false ignorance. This false ignorance, even when sublated, continues for a while owing to past tendencies like the continuance of the vision of two moons.” “The body continues to exist after gaining knowledge. It also means that only those virtues and vices are burnt by knowledge which have not begun to bear fruit.” [ BSB translated by Swami Gambhirananda, Advaita Ashrama].
There is a doubt about the status of virtue and vice of a man of knowledge when he dies. One view is that virtues accompany because they are not contrary to knowledge. The aphorist clarifies that he leaves behind both virtue and vice as nothing remains to be attained. They are sublated by the power of knowledge since their results are contrary to knowledge. In support is cited Ch Up 8.13.1: “Having shaken off sin like a horse shaking off its hair” It is also said that “His sons inherit his properties, the friends his good deeds, and the foes his bad deeds”.
BSB 3.4.1 and 3.4.2
Knowledge is the direct means of liberation independent of rites. A jiva is eternally free but freedom is hidden due to ignorance. Following texts support it. The knower of Self crosses all sorrow (Ch 7.1.3), He who knows a teacher, delay is only as long as his body does not fall, after that he merges with Brahman, i.e., Videhamukta (6.14.2). Self is free from all sins (Ch 8.7.1).
BSB 4.1.1 & 4.1.2
Opponent: There are Upanishadic texts, “The Self, my dear, should be realized-should be heard of, reflected on, and meditated upon” (Br.4.5.6), “Knowing about this (Self) alone, the intelligent aspirant after Brahman should attain intuitive knowledge” (Br. 4.4.21), “He is to be searched after, He is to be desired to be known” (Ch. 8.7.1), and so on. A doubt is whether the mental act is to be undertaken once only, or it is to be repeated. Vedantin: Repetition is necessary because hearing etc fulfil their purpose of intuitive realization of Brahman through repetition. Upasana (continuous remembrance, adoration) and nidhidhyasana (profound meditation) involve repetition. Opponent: If the hearing of such texts as “That thou art” (Ch. 6.8.7) once does not generate the realization of the identity of Brahman and the Self, then it may not do so despite repetition.
Vedantin: Repetition will be unnecessary for one who can realize the Self as Brahman after hearing “That thou art” once only. But for one who cannot do so, repetition is a necessity. Uddalaka has repeated “That art that” several times. “It is to be heard of, reflected on, and meditated upon” (Br. 4.5.6).
To be concluded