Summary: 

---

Mandukya Upanishad – Verse 6:

You'll see notes for this verse in previous session, starting from headline: What is the Material Cause into Which Everything Reduces

Mandukya Upanishad – Verse 7:

What Atma is Not

न अन्तः-प्रज्ञम् न बहिः-प्रज्ञम् न उभयतः-प्रज्ञम् न प्रज्ञान-घनम् न प्रज्ञम् न अप्रज्ञम्  ।
na antaḥ-prajñam na bahiḥ-prajñam na ubhayataḥ-prajñam na prajñāna-ghanam na prajñam na aprajñam  |

They recognize the fourth to be that which is not conscious of the inner world, nor conscious of the outer world, nor conscious of both worlds [inner/outer], nor a mass of consciousness. It is not conscious nor is It unconscious.

What Atma is Not

अदृष्टम् अव्यवहार्यम् अग्राह्यम् अलक्षणम् अचिन्त्यम् अव्यपदेश्यम् एक-आत्म-प्रत्यय-सारम् ।
adṛṣṭam avyavahāryam agrāhyam alakṣaṇam acintyam avyapadeśyam eka-ātma-pratyaya-sāram |

It is unseen – beyond empirical dealings, cannot be grasped, without any ground for inference, not available as an object of thought and not an object of expression by words. [It is to be understood as] the one and same atman that obtains in the three states.

What Atma Is (svarupa-lakshana)

प्रपञ्च-उपशमम् शान्तम् शिवम् अद्वैतम् चतुर्थम् मन्यन्ते । सः आत्मा सः विज्ञेयः ॥७॥
prapañca-upaśamam śāntam śivam advaitam caturtham manyante | saḥ ātmā saḥ vijñeyaḥ ||7||

It is free from the world of all phenomena; It is unchanging, auspicious, non-dual. That is atman and that has to be understood.

1. What Atma is Not

न अन्तः-प्रज्ञम् न बहिः-प्रज्ञम् न उभयतः-प्रज्ञम् न प्रज्ञान-घनम् न प्रज्ञम् न अप्रज्ञम्  ।
na antaḥ-prajñam na bahiḥ-prajñam na ubhayataḥ-prajñam na prajñāna-ghanam na prajñam na aprajñam  |

They recognize the fourth to be that which is not conscious of the inner world, nor conscious of the outer world, nor conscious of both worlds [inner/outer], nor a mass of consciousness. It is not conscious nor is It unconscious.

Self is NOT the First Quarter: Physical body / Waker

Body

Is legs/hands/teeth the entire physical body? No.

When different parts (which none are “body”) come together, then we call it “body”.

Thus “body” has dependent reality and is not really a body since it’s made of non-body.

Then we take just one part of the hand. Is the muscle/bone/skin “hand”? No. Again non-hand comes together, and forms a hand. So it’s dependent reality within dependent reality. Nothing has absolute existence.

For instance, I can watch my arm/leg dissolve, yet I am. Meaning “I am” doesn't depend on existence of a hand, finger, cell, many cells, etc. And since arm/leg is extension of total physical (vaishvanara), I can watch it dissolve too, yet I am.

Through this vision, when you look at a body, you understand it as “forms within forms”; it has no real substance. Knowing that, you still acknowledge, “I have a body”.

Cells

The cells aren’t randomly put together. Each cell performs a different function.

But, just like for body, non-cell makes up “cell”, such as cytoplasm, ribosomes (factories building proteins), mitochondria (energy factories). So cell too had a dependent reality, which are put together cleverly by arrangement of Ishvara.

Conclusion

So nothing about physical can be “I”. For instance, cells are constantly changing and can be objectified and die. But “I” don't die, so my existence can't be contingent on life of a cell, or trillions of cells making up “body”.

Therefore first part (physical) of Atma is negated as mithya. Physical is only a part of you when you don’t recognize body’s mithya status.

So verse 1-6 started by saying what you are, and now it’s negating it. You don’t let go of “I am”, but attributes imputed on “I am”.

Atma is not the outwardly conscious (na bahiḥ-prajñam)

Refers to waking-knower, waking-subject, waking-personality. Refers to the waker who says “I am thirsty and tired”, who is dissolved in dream, thus can't be physical body self.

CORRECTION: I am not merely this waking-subject facing an external world. I am the awareness to whom the waking subject and waking world are both evident. Additionally, if I was the waker, I would be scared to die to it for dreamer to be come.

Not conscious of both inner and outer (na ubhayataḥ-prajñam)

You might erroneously think: Turīya is not dream-consciousness and not waking-consciousness. Maybe it a special kind of consciousness that’s combination of waking and dream consciousness. Or maybe turiya, the true consciousness, is some kind of an in-between state, like a drug induced state.

This line cancels out any drug-induced non-dual experience, and any imagination that consciousness is a mixed-state which is somehow entered upon much practice.

CORRECTION: You are not consciousness plus an object. You are consciousness because of which entered-states are known. If you ever feel like you’re entering a different state (like when body dies), whatever is shown to you (life review, angels, DMT, etc) – remember, you are free of it. Because Awareness was there before that magical state started, observing another ordinary state.

Not conscious (na prajñam)

It does not mean Turīya is unconscious. After you say “I’m not the physical, subtle, causal”, you’ll take the individual awareness as you. Awareness is nothing specific to you. The confined cup-space is the total space.

Do not imagine Turīya as one more knower sitting behind your mind, watching everything like a hidden person. Do not imagine it as an individual witness.

This also wants to bring attention to a common mistake: Erroneously understanding consciousness to mean: “I am seeing something,” “I am hearing something,” “I am thinking something,” “I am understanding something.”

In all these cases, consciousness seems tied to an object or to experiencing. So you conclude, “I am conscious only when I know something, only when there's an experience of something.”  Thus you take yourself to be the ever changing hearer, smeller, perceiver. But if you analyze your experience, if you lose your vision, awareness is not lost. If lose hearing, awareness is not lost. If capacity to think is lost, awareness is not lost. 

CORRECTION:

You are not conscious because you know objects. Instead, objects are known because you are consciousness.

When a thought appears, you know it. When the thought disappears, you also know its absence. Hence you continue to exist despite absence of objects.

The mind by itself is like a chair in a dark room: inert, not self-revealing, and not conscious by itself. When consciousness “lights up” the mind, the mind appears as a knower, enjoyer, and sufferer: “I think,” “I feel,” “I know,” “I am happy,” “I am hurt.”

This illumined mind is what we usually mistake to be “me.” Therefore we think, “If the thinker is absent, I am absent,” or “If the feeler/enjoyer is not there, I am not there.”

But look carefully: “I think,” “I feel,” “I know,” “I don’t know,” “I am happy,” “I am sad” – all these are changing roles of the mind. Sometimes the mind is a thinker, sometimes a feeler, sometimes a knower, sometimes confused, sometimes happy, sometimes disturbed.

Since these roles are known to you, you cannot be those roles. You are the Ātman, the awareness because of which the changing mind and its roles are known.

Not unconscious / nothing / void (na aprajñam)

Awareness is not nothingness, state of coma, unconsciousness, blankness, absence, or void. It is evident consciousness, wakefulness, am-ness.

You are evident awareness because of which waking is known, dream is known, sleep is later recognized, and even ignorance is revealed.

You may ask, “If I am not the waking-knower, not the dream-knower, and not the sleeper, then am I nothing?” No. What comes and goes must appear to something that does not come and go. So Awareness can’t be nothing. Because the one to whom 3 states appear, knows oneself as an awareful-existent being – no matter what experience is observed.

For example, when you say, “There is a snake”, the snake is false, but it still depends on the rope for its seeming existence. The “is” belongs to the rope, not the snake. Whether you see the rope is a different matter; point is, that which appears/disappears (like the 3 states), shows there must be a basis on which they depend.

Similarly, when you say “there IS waking/dream/sleep”, the “IS” stretches across the the states. That “IS”, is Atma, pervading the three states, thus you're able to say “I know of the three states”. 

Self is NOT the Second Quarter: Subtle body / Dreamer

Subtle-body has 19 capacities (5 instruments that enable perception, 5 instruments that enable action, 5 pranas, buddhi, citta, manas, ahamkara) that allows it to perceive/act/emote/think/recall/remember.

Let's focus on 5 instruments that enable perception:

Imagine being born color blind. You take a pill and color returns. Has that experience changed the sight, or me, the observer of color-blind, non-color-blind sight? It changed sight. Thus I am the observer of the changing sight, and not sight itself.  Similarly, observer doesn't change when hearing is gone.

Mind:

We attempt to manipulate the mind because it’s mixed with your identity. Thoughts come and go. If you were the thought, you’d have a different identity each moment.

Let's analyze what makes up a thought…

No-Thought + No-Thought = Thought.  Exactly like no-hand (muscle) + no-hand (bone) = hand.

EG: Sense-object is no-thought, memory is no-thought, attention turning toward it is no-thought, and yet when these no-thought factors assemble in the mind, a vṛtti appears as “I am hungry”.

So no-thought + no-thought = thought.

Additionally, a thought is an object (just like a mouse) that appears and disappears in your awareness.

Therefore, you can't be your thoughts.

Not inwardly conscious (na antaḥ-prajñam):

Refers to the dream-subject, dream-knower — who is created by your mind, past impression, memories… for a few minutes that feels like hours or years sometimes.

CORRECTION: I am not the one who merely knows inner objects. I am the consciousness because of which even the dreamer is known. Turīya is not consciousness conditioned by the dreamer.

 

Self is NOT the Third Quarter: Causal Body / Deep Sleeper

Micro: If you were a desire or samskara-groove (ie: causal body), then you’d only be awake to yourself when desire comes out. And you'd disappear when the groove or habit is replaced by another.

Macro: Ishvara which created the entire physical universe, and my physical body. Created the entire subtle universe, in which one of them is mine. And created the laws which makes my physical/subtle body what it is. The physical/subtle is changing, and because Ishvara is their cause, Ishvara is changing also.

Not a mass of consciousness / undifferentiated potential (na prajñāna-ghanam)

Refers to deep sleep condition. Many people believe the true consciousness is this deep-sleep like undifferentiated state.

They believe if you’re enlightened, you’re experiencing a state of blankness (similar to deep sleep), absence of thoughts.

Some try to attain it via yoga-nidra, being awake to nothing.

CORRECTION: “I am not the blank causal condition in which objects are unmanifest. I am the consciousness because of which even the presence and absence of mental activity are known.”

 

---

2. What Self is Not ^{[In Video 7]}

अदृष्टम् अव्यवहार्यम् अग्राह्यम् अलक्षणम् अचिन्त्यम् अव्यपदेश्यम् एक-आत्म-प्रत्यय-सारम् ।
adṛṣṭam avyavahāryam agrāhyam alakṣaṇam acintyam avyapadeśyam eka-ātma-pratyaya-sāram |

It is unseen – beyond empirical dealings, cannot be grasped, without any ground for inference, not available as an object of thought and not an object of expression by words. [It is to be understood as] the one and same atman that obtains in the three states.

Unseen (adṛṣṭam)

When there is a thought that gives a different experience – is there awareness or not? Yes.

For example, tree thought is replaced with though of your first intimate companion. Each generates a different experience (sight, sensation, smell, sound).

But what is the consistent across each object or experience, because of which I know about them? Awareness (ie: the Self, Atma)

Relationship between thought & awareness: Thought is like table, and awareness is like wood. Table can’t be without wood.

Additionally, awareness can’t be an experience or thought because they arise in time. To suddenly have no sense of time (for instance when drug induced), and return to “sense of time” – shows Awareness wasn’t dependent on time. So Awareness has nothing to do with expansion or becoming big – as that involves a beginning.

CORRECTION: Ātman is not the seen. Ātman is the very awareness because of which seeing is possible, or even the dissatisfaction experienced of thinking you’ve not seen it yet, is possible.

Beyond empirical dealings (avyavahāryam)

You cannot deal with Self as “this thing,” “that person,” “this object,” “that place,” “this action,” or “that result.”

So when you say, “I want to reach Atma” (a statement you say towards empirical things) – that is useful at the beginning, but not accurate.

You cannot reach, possess it, improve it, purify it, or exchange Atma. You are it. You are the awareness in whose presence all empirical dealings appear.

Ungraspable (agrāhyam)

To grasp something, means it’s located in space, and it’s not here now. Whereas atma is your very consciousness, and is never not present, and there’s never a time or place you can find where there is absence of observer. Even to say “deep sleep”, implies something was observing deep sleep, to even bring it up later in the waking.

Thus the observer/witness can’t be acquired/grasped as a new thing at some location, at some time, in some higher world.

CORRECTION: Awareness was only as-though away from you because you held onto notion that it’s something to be grown or found in the future. Awareness is praptasya-prapti (already attained). It is asking you to stop treating Atma as something catchable. Ātma, or consciousness is already self-evident as the “I” because of which every act of grasping is known, including the futile attempt to grasp consciousness. 

Without marks or indicators (alakṣaṇam)

Ordinary things are known by their characteristics/marks. Fire has heat and light. Water has liquidity. A person has height, form, behavior, name, and qualities. But Consciousness (turiya) has no visible mark, no color, no size, no form, no boundary, no special feature.

CORRECTION: Don’t ask, “What does Self look like?”. Self does not look like anything. You can’t indicate Consciousness through another attribute. It is that because of which all looks/attributes are known. For consciousness to manifest as any attribute, it has to intrinsically be free from all attributes. EG: If I’m intrinsically happy, I can be sad, and vice-versa.

Not available as a thought-object (acintyam)

Knowledge of anything takes place via vrtti (though form, such as “cloud thought”). Then you say, “That is a cloud”. In case of cloud, it’s a specific image. However knowing awareness is different. To understand, let's learn about…

Two Processes for any knowledge to take place:

• • Vrtti-vyapti: Thought takes form of tree.
  • Phala-vyapti: As result of the objectification, “tree” ignorance goes away.

With atma, there’s no vrtti-vyapti as atma isn’t an objectifiable form.

You then use the words of Vedanta – and without objectification (vrtti-vyapti) – the notion of atma as an object, is removed. Meaning you come to see the highest reality is the very self because of which everything is objectified.

Awareness is the only “thing” that can be known without objectification (without vrrti-vyapti taking place), because it is always present.

Not describable by words (avyapadeśyam)

How can limited words indicate limitlessness? The process we use is called bhāga-tyāga-lakṣaṇā – one aspect of the word is retained (bhāga), and the limited aspect of the word is given up or thrown away (tyāga).

Vedānta takes you from vācyārtha (direct meaning) — to lakṣyārtha (intended meaning).

Describing Brahman as sat-cit:

• 1. Sat — existence: When Vedanta says Brahman is sat, it does not mean “one existing thing inside time and space.” That would make Brahman just another object, like a pot, body, planet, or thought. Instead, Vedanta uses sat to point to the existence that is common to all things. For example: pot is, clay is, molecule is, atom is, thought is, space is, time is. The names and forms keep changing — pot, clay, molecule, atom, thought — but the simple fact “is” remains. That is-ness, free from any particular name and form, is what Vedanta calls sat. So the vācyārtha of “existence” may sound like “existence of a thing,” but the lakṣyārtha is pure existence itself, because of which every thing can be said to be.
  2. Cit — consciousness: When Vedanta says Brahman is cit, it does not mean “my sober/intoxicated” consciousness, or confused-consciousness, or happy-consciousness, etc.  It is pointing to the presence because of which all of them are revealed.

It is to be understood as the one and same atman that obtains in the three states (eka-ātma-pratyaya-sāram)

There is one unbroken “I” that “shines” on anything inside the three states.

 

---

3. What Atma Is (svarupa-lakshana) ^{[In Video 8]}

प्रपञ्च-उपशमम् शान्तम् शिवम् अद्वैतम् चतुर्थम् मन्यन्ते । सः आत्मा सः विज्ञेयः ॥७॥
prapañca-upaśamam śāntam śivam advaitam caturtham manyante | saḥ ātmā saḥ vijñeyaḥ ||7||

It is free from the world of all phenomena; It is unchanging, auspicious, non-dual. That is atman and that has to be understood.

Free from the world of phenomena (prapañca-upaśamam)

Prapañca (or jagat) means the whole field of names and forms. Basically the total physical/subtle world.

It includes body, mind, senses, thoughts, emotions, objects, people, time, space, cause and effect. In short, everything you can experience, think about, describe, or transact with. And upaśamam means resolved.

Meaning this entire world of names and forms is resolved in Self. But “resolved” does not mean the world goes somewhere, or that Self is like a container holding the world. Do not imagine Self like a pot containing water. A pot and water are in the same order of reality, so we can speak of one thing being inside another. But Ātman and jagat are different orders of reality.

Think of water appearing as different ice structures — an ice statue, ice wall, ice cube, ice mountain. Each has a different name and form, but all depend on water. The ice statue is not “inside” water; it is water appearing in that form. When you understand it as water, the statue-name-and-form is resolved. Water remains free from statue-ness, wall-ness, cube-ness, and mountain-ness.

So prapañca-upaśamam means: the world is not an independent reality apart from Ātman; it is resolved in Ātman through understanding.

Therefore do not look for Ātman as one object inside the world. It is the very material cause of everything.

Peaceful / unchanging (śāntam)

Can’t give “peace” or “calm mental state” attribute to Atma. Both disturbance and peace exist because of Atma, yet Atma is free of both.

Śāntam refers to peace that comes from understanding: there is no second thing apart from the Self that can complete me, threaten me, or truly limit me. Yes, this does translate also into emotional peace through nididhyasana.

Self is also called “peaceful” because it’s never disturbed by functions of mind.

Auspicious / whole / free from sorrow or lack (śivam)

Meaning 1: “Shiva” means that which is most auspicious (precious); which is Ishvara (that which includes everything, including you). But if exclude yourself from Ishvara, then it’s not most auspicious. Another way is to say the most auspicious to me is to know that I'm not an isolated individual, but the WHOLE. You can’t get more auspicious then “I am limitless”.

Meaning 2: Śiva (remover of ignorance) leads you to see that which is most auspicious/precious to you… that you are not a needy, wounded, incomplete person.

Non-dual (advaitam)

How to arrive to non-duality? By cognitive knowledge that everything depends on Awareness. Atma is the only independently existing reality. You don’t have to destroy the chair, table, etc – to arrive to the wood. In the same way, all states depend on awareness.

Hence Advaita doesn’t contradict dvaita. There is one reality appearing as many names and forms.

It is regarded as the fourth (caturtham manyante)

If Atma were a fourth state, then it would also come and go, just like the other three. You would enter it, stay for some time, and leave it. Additionally, if the fourth were totally other than three states, the waker could never know it.

Why call it forth? Because Upanishads first shows physical, subtle, causal – then says, there’s something other then these three. It is the ever-present awareness because of which the first three are known.

Ishvara's Truth Is Atma (Sat-Cit-Anantam)

In verse 1-6, “OM” stopped at Ishvara (all-knowledge) as final satyam.

Now in verse 7, we can say that even all-knowledge has its basis in Consciousness.

All-knowledge depends on Consciousness, while Consciousness is independent of all-knowledge. For example, you are perfectly Aware before a plan (little-knowledge) arises in your Awareness.

Now the syllable “OM” is complete.

What is the Difference Between the Cause of the Universe (Ishvara) and Awareness?

Ishvara:

Ishvara is parinami-upadana-karnam – meaning cause that undergoes transformation to become effect. EG: You don’t find milk in cheese.

Similarly, you don't see all-knowledge sitting there as an object inside any given form. Rather, all-knowledge is manifesting AS the entire form.

Also, all-knowledge is constantly changing it between manifest-unmanifest. For example, each thought or action of your body changes all-knowledge Ishvara. 

So what is bringing about changes in past-present-future? Ishvara. And what is changing Ishvara? The manifestations interacting with each other. Just like what is changing the ocean (Ishvara), are the waves. So the physical universe you see is really just Ishvara in visible form.

Awareness:

It is vivarta-upadana-karana – water appears as rain/drizzle/ice/droplet/vapour/ocean – but their essential nature remains water. 

So water is upadana-karnama (material cause), but it is vivarta (doesn’t undergo change).  Dream is another example of vivarta-upadana-karana; in which your existence doesn’t become any object existent in the dream.

What proves Awareness is vivarta? If Awareness changed, then you could not relate to it. You would never know about it, and shastra would be useless as it would be talking about a different awareness then you have. 

If Brahman Is Already Your Nature, Why Go Through The Process? Why The Journey?

Here the tenth man story illuminates the paradox:

Ten men cross a river. One counts the others but leaves himself out, and concludes with grief that the tenth man is missing. (Tenth man stands for the whole).

When a passerby says, “You are the tenth man,” no new man appears – only knowledge of what was already the case

The knower of the tenth man is the tenth man.

Conclusion: In ordinary knowledge, the knower and the known remain separate – the microbiologist does not become the microbe, nor does the historian become history. But Brahman is yourself, and so the knower of Brahman becomes Brahman.

Doubt & Answers:

Doubt: If self has no quality, no action, no relation, no class, then teaching it is useless.

Answer: Knowledge of self ends thirst for what is not self. Binding force of objects goes away, knowing they have a dependent reality. For instance, when mother-of-pearl (shell) is known as mother-of-pearl, thirst for silver ends. One no longer runs after the imagined silver.

Suppose This Verse Eluded You, Why Is That?

First step in Vedanta is distinguishing pratibhasika-mithya (snake) and vyavaharika-mithya (rope). Vedanta is analyzing vyavaharika-mithya; the empirical world. But if person is still at pratibhasika-mithya (personal projections), they won’t relate and will misinterpret the Upanishad.

You’ll continue to see the world as a snake, thus preoccupied with it because of discomfort/fear – and to cancel out that discomfort, one brings in the final reality prematurely (for emotional comfort or sense of identity).

So how do you know mind has more work to do on itself? Majority of your thoughts are about surface things about “that” object, instead of seeing realities behind it.

NEXT VERSE: For first time, we'll get into Gaudapada Karika to add further clarity what we've seen so far…

—

Recorded 6 Jan, 2026