Summary:

Vivekachudamani, Verse 63-64: The Self is the unchanging witness that illumines all mental modifications and their absence, yet is itself never an object of experience. To discover it, one must cognitively analyze the not-Self – states of mind, objects, sheaths – and find the two constants: existence and awareness, which is the real I. This analysis must be continually reinforced until habitual, because the unprepared mind resists it; the ego fears its own annihilation, though in truth nothing is lost except the source of suffering.

Vivekachudamani, Verse 65: Awareness is self-evident beyond doubt, for nothing else can prove consciousness since everything is known only through it – like eyes proved by the mere virtue of objects seen. It shines uniformly as “I, I” across waking, dream, and deep sleep: the first “I” being pure changeless consciousness, the second its reflection as the I-thought in the intellect. Though the I-thought takes on shapes of emptiness or limitation through identification with thought-size, the underlying awareness remains untouched. It objectifies everything from the ego-sense through mind, life-force, body, and world – yet itself remains formless, like light revealing colors without taking their hue.

Vivekachudamani, Verse 66: Freedom from birth and death comes through directly seeing you are not separate from the limitless – like an elephant bound only by a mental rope, instantly free once the restraint is shown to be unreal. In ignorance the I seemed confined like pot-space, but was never different from total space. The shift is discriminating between the ego-I that contracts and expands, and unchanging awareness.

Vivekachudamani, Verse 67 – Part 1: Brahman is defined not as a list of qualities, but as a single integrated lakṣaṇa – existence (satyam), knowledge (jñānam), and limitless (anantam). Anantam cancels all limitations of ordinary vṛtti-jñāna: object, space, and time. Satyam is never an adjective but the noun – existence itself, the unchanging is-ness appearing as all things.

---

Vivekachudamani – Verse 63-64: Teacher: “Yes, Good Question!”

सत्यम् उक्तं त्वया विद्वन् निपुणः असि विचारणे
अहम् आदि विकाराः ते तत् अभावः अयम् अपि अनु (२१३ , अल्त् २१५)
satyam uktaṁ tvayā vidvan nipuṇaḥ asi vicāraṇe
aham ādi vikārāḥ te tat abhāvaḥ ayam api anu (213 , Alt 215)

सर्वे येन अनुभूयन्ते यः स्वयं न अनुभूयते
तम् आत्मानं वेदितारं विद्धि बुद्ध्या सुसूक्ष्मया (२१४, अल्त् २१६)
sarve yena anubhūyante yaḥ svayaṁ na anubhūyate
tam ātmānaṁ veditāraṁ viddhi buddhyā susūkṣmayā (214, Alt 216)

Andre: All the changing states of the mind – like the ahamkara, thoughts, feelings, and their disappearance (as in deep sleep) – are perceived by ‘something’ constant behind them. That which knows all these experiences – but itself is never an object of experience – is the real Self, your true nature, the pure knower.

Alt: All This (koshas) is perceived by That (atman), but That (atman) you cannot perceive with This (koshas)! That is the Self, the real You, the only Knower.

The teacher shows method of atma-anatma viveka in two ways:

The Self (Ātmā) is the unchanging witness (sākṣī) that illuminates/objectifies all mental modifications (vikāras) and their absence (eg: in deep sleep), but is itself never experienced as an object.

To discover atma, you need to cognitively analyse anatma (states of mind, objects, koshas, etc) – and you’ll always find two constants: existence-awareness, which is the real I.

The analysis or viveka must be ongoingly reinforced, until becomes a habit, to overcome deeply ingrained identifications.

Unprepared mind resists atma-anatma-viveka:

When the mind is unprepared/unrefined, it resists atma-anatma-viveka, because the ego (the changing self you think you are) believes it is the only “I”, and thus fears its annihilation. But the individual loses nothing except the source of suffering.

Vivekachudamani – Verse 65: Always Shines as “I, I, I, etc”

जाग्रत्-स्वप्न-सुषुप्तिषु स्फुटतरं यः असौ समुज्जृम्भते
प्रत्यक्-रूपतया सदा अहम्-अहम् इति अन्तः स्फुरन् एकधा
नाना-आकार-विकार-भागिनः इमान् पश्यन् अहम्-धी-मुखान्
नित्य-आनन्द-चित्-आत्मना स्फुरति तं विद्धि स्वम् एतं हृदि (२१७, अल्त् २१९)
jāgrat-svapna-suṣuptiṣu sphuṭataraṁ yaḥ asau samujjṛmbhate
pratyak-rūpatayā sadā aham-aham iti antaḥ sphuran ekadhā
nānā-ākāra-vikāra-bhāginaḥ imān paśyan aham-dhī-mukhān
nitya-ānanda-cit-ātmanā sphurati taṁ viddhi svam etaṁ hṛdi (217, Alt 219)

May you know in your buddhi as yourself that ātmā as taught now, who clearly shines independently by itself in the waking, dream and sleep, always shining in the same form as ‘I, I, I, etc’ – as the innermost self, objectifying these various forms and modifications from ahaṅkāra onwards and which shines in the form of ānanda and consciousness that is not subject to time.

“Awareness (knowing in your buddhi), shines independently by itself in the three states” ^{(jāgrat‑svapna‑suṣuptiṣu sphuṭataraṁ yo’sau samujjṛmbhate)}

Without a doubt, evident: ^{(sphuṭataraṁ)}

You notice a self-evident presence. Your awareness proves itself by the very fact that everything else is evident because of it. Just like every object is evident in presence of the physical eye, or ever smell in presence of the tongue, every sound evidence in presence of ear. 

Even blankness, as spoken of in V62, becomes a new evident “thing” in my presence, thus blankness can't be Me, the ever-evident one.

Even the sudden thought that “I have a higher level of consciousness then most people”, is another object evident to awareness. So “levels of consciousness” is identity with vijnanamaya kosha.

Remains in 3 states

This self-evident presence brings to light that there is waking, dream and deep sleep experience. I know about the waking state (and the hundreds of experiences that make up the waking state) — the waking state doesn't know Me. 

Summary:

“Sphuṭataram” means without doubt evident – for nothing else can prove the presence of consciousness, since everything is known only through it. Just like eyes are evident by the mere virtue of objects seen.

“Always shining in the same (uniform) form as ‘I, I, I, etc’ ”  ^{(pratyagrūpatayā sadā ahaṁ‑ahaṁ iti antaḥ sphuran ekadhā)}

Interpretation 1 of “Always shining as I-I”:

The inner pulsation, “I‑I-I, etc” never stops because it is the substance of all things.

“I” or Awareness, like the light shining equally on all objects, making them known, always remains the same (“ekadhā sphuran” – it shines uniformly).

For example, the pot‑knowledge and tree‑knowledge differ, but their illumining awareness is the same; just as one light falls on many shapes but remains formless itself.

Or when you say, “I am happy, I am sad” – the difference belongs to the thought, not to you. You are the changeless illuminer of all changing moods.

It is the ever-present “I”, the consciousness in whose presence every experience is illumined. There’s something about you that stays unbroken, pure and free — no matter how healthy, sick, dull, intelligent the body-mind-prana is.

Interpretation 2 of “Always shining as I-I” — Meaning the “I” that Illumines the “I-Thought”:

The verse’s repetition “I–I” (aham–aham) signifies two layers of identity experienced as one — the changeless Self (ātman) and its reflection in the intellect, the ego-sense (ahaṁkāra), or the “I-Thought” as called in Vivekachudamani.

The first “I” refers to the pure, attribute-free consciousness, the unchanging witness that never undergoes modification.

The second “I” is the reflected consciousness, the “I-thought” arising when awareness shines “on” the subtle body (intellect or buddhi), which manifests as sense-of-individual-I (ahamkara).

So the teacher wants to show, even as the “I-Thought” takes on shape of emptiness or limitation (because it’s identified with size of thoughts, which is why one always wants to have bigger/happier thoughts) – the underlying awareness that illumines that empty or limited “I-thought”, remains untouched.

“…objectifying these various forms and modifications from ahaṅkāra onwards” ^{(nānākāra‑vikāra‑bhāgina imān paśyan ahaṁ‑dhī‑mukhān)}

Ātmā illumines all objectifiable things – beginning with your “I‑feeling” (ahaṅkāra), extending through mind, prāṇa, body, and the external world.

Everything that can be noticed or thought – each is “seen” (paśyan) by this awareness.

Ātmā merely objectifies them; it itself is formless and changeless, like light revealing varied colors while never taking their hue.

“…is not subject to time” ^{(nityānanda‑cidātmanā)}

Ātmā is nitya‑ānanda‑cidātmā – ever‑whole-partless consciousness, untouched by birth, growth, or decay.

Nitya means that which never alters.

Your thoughts of past, present, future – flicker in its light, yet you, the awareness itself, do not age. Like the unmoving sun witnessing clouds drift across the sky.

 

THE NATURE OF BRAHMAN –
MEANING OF ‘THAT’ IN THE MAHĀVĀKYA

Vivekachudamani – Verse 66: You can do this! You were made to succeed!

ब्रह्म अभिन्नत्व विज्ञानं भव मोक्षस्य कारणं
येन अद्वितीयम् आनन्दं ब्रह्म सम्पद्यते बुधैः (२२३, अल्त् २२५)
brahma abhinnatva vijñānaṁ bhava mokṣasya kāraṇaṁ
yena advitīyam ānandaṁ brahma sampadyate budhaiḥ (223, Alt 225)

That knowledge of the non-separateness of the self from Brahman – by which Brahman of the nature of non-dual happiness is gained by wise people – is the means for release from saṁsāra.

Knowledge of the non-separateness of self and Brahman (brahma-abhinnatva-vijñānam) – is freedom from samsara (bith-death):

Meaning you are freed from saṁsāra (birth-death) by the knowledge that you are not separate from Brahman. It’s not an idea, but a direct seeing what was always true (there’s no second thing).

Samsara ends when the notional wall between “you” and the “limitless” vanishes.

In ignorance, “I” was good as the space in the pot. In reality that pot-space wasn’t different from total space.

Similarly, your “I” was never yours, it is the universal “I”.

The shift involves discriminating between ahamkara-I, which contracts/expands depending on what it’s associated to, and the unchanging awareness.

Example showing what “notional wall” means:

Like the elephant tied to a post only by a thin rope. The rope of bondage is only in his mind. When shown, his restraint isn’t real, he’s instantly freed. He didn’t gain anything, just removed a wrong notion.

Additionally, once knowledge is steady, you see that the Self and not-Self distinction was only provisional. They enjoy a satya-mithya relationship, thus you don’t have to separate yourself from koshas to come in contact with Awareness.

Vivekachudamani – Verse 67: What is Consciousness?

सत्यं ज्ञानम् अनन्तं ब्रह्म
विशुद्धं परं स्वतः सिद्धं
नित्य आनन्द एक रसं प्रत्यक्
अभिन्नं निरन्तरं जयति (२२५, अल्त् २२७)
satyaṁ jñānam anantaṁ brahma
viśuddhaṁ paraṁ svataḥ siddhaṁ
nitya ānanda eka rasaṁ pratyak
abhinnaṁ nirantaraṁ jayati (225, Alt 227)

Brahman which is defined as existence, knowledge and limitless – is free from impurities, beyond māyā, self-evident, happiness not bound by time or degree, and is always available non-separate from oneself.

1) “Existence, knowledge and limitless” ^{(satyaṁ jñānam anantaṁ brahma)}

Phrase “satyaṁ jñānam anantam” is not a list of separate qualities, but a single, integrated definition (lakṣaṇa) designed to reveal Brahman (your true nature). 

All three terms refer to the same reality from different angles.

The crucial word is anantam (limitless / infinite), as it prevents limited interpretation of satyam (existence) and jñānam (knowledge).

Here’s the limited interpretation of Satyam-Jnanam:

1. 1. Satyam (Existence):
      1. Ordinarily, satyam (existence) means some thing that exists within time and space.
   2. Jnanam (Knowledge):
      1. Knowledge arises at a specific time. Meaning, it comes and goes. EG: Before seeing the tree, that particular knowledge is absent. Once thinking about tree, knowledge-tree is present in that duration.
      2. It is object-specific. EG: Knowledge of the tree is NOT knowledge of Sanskrit, and Knowledge of Sanskrit is NOT knowledge of tree. So this kind of knowledge is limited to a single object.
      3. It is object-dependent. EG: When object of tree is seen or sound is heard, knowledge of tree takes place. Meaning, the knowledge won't arise until the object shows up. Knowledge is dormant as long as object is not perceived.
      4. It belongs to an individual mind.
      5. In short, this type of knowledge is called vṛtti‑jñāna (mental modification corresponding to an object). Vṛtti‑jñāna is produced when mind + sense organs contact an object

However, anantam cancels above limitations:

1. 1. Object-limitation (Vastu-pariccheda): Brahman is not one existent object among others (like a tree or a person), but the very consciousness in which all objects and all experiences appear.
   2. Space-limitation (Deśa-pariccheda): Brahman existence is not confined to a location; it is all-pervasive.
   3. Time-limitation (Kāla-pariccheda): Brahman is not bound by past, present, or future; it is the eternal “is-ness” that is always present.

Proper interpretation of Satyam-Jnanam-Anantam:

1. Satyam (Existence):

Satyam is not “a thing that exists,” but existence itself, the unchanging is-ness that never goes out of existence, and cannot be negated in past-present-future.

Additionally, satyam is a noun, not an adjective.

Meaning “satyam” isn't something that describes something else, such as in the sentence “an existent table”, or “an existent brown table”. In this sentence, the “table” is treated as the noun, while “existent” and “brown” is the adjective.

So it seems the table can do without “existent”, as if “existent” is something the table possesses, just like it posses “brown” color.

However “satyam” is NEVER an adjective, but the noun because of which table-is.

You can't say “table” unless it exists in the first place.

So the material cause of the table is existence (satyam). It's actually more accurate to say tably-existence, or existence in form of a “table”, or existence appearing as a “table”.

This means your buddhi needs to shift from seeing the world full of existent things, to existence  appearing as things and world.

Here's some examples to demonstrate the relationship between objects and existence:

1. 1. 1. 1. Thought is. Absence-of-thought is.
         2. Pot is > clay is > silica is > atom is > etc.
         3. Awareness is. Meaning Awareness is not nothing. However awareness is the only reality to which you can't say “absence-of-awareness is”. If that was true, then what is there to recognize that fact? Unlike objects, Awareness doesn’t go.

2. Jñānam (Knowledge):

1. 1. 1. Consciousness / Self-revealing Awareness: This “knowledge” word isn't referring to knowledge of something (a mental event) — but pure Consciousness (cit / caitanya) — the non-objectifiable knower or aware-ing presence in which all perceptions/knowing occurs. Here, the word “knower” is not the changing knower (ahamkara / pramātā / I-thought) — but the self-revealing awareness (svayam-prakāśa) throughout every condition of the changing knower.
      2. Illuminating Light: The “light” in whose presence any produced knowledge (vrtti-jnanam; mental event) comes to be instantly known.
      3. Unqualified knowledge: Unqualified knowledge or objectless awareness. It’s the knowledge/awareness that remains after names-forms fall away. EG: Tree-knowledge, elephant-knowledge, emptiness-knowledge. Knowledge remains in all cases.
      4. Invariable/unchanging: Self is the invariable/unchanging presence because of which comings/goings of any thought/memory/emotions are known. Proof it’s unchanging is if any attribute (like thought/emotion) stuck to the unchanging Awareness, then it would be superimposed over every object.  Thus Awareness never takes on attribute of anything observed. Put another way: If Awareness ever took on an attribute, it would've changed. How do we prove it hasn't changed? Because there's no one object stuck onto it. Meaning it's always formless. It's never formless + happiness. 
      5. Koshas are Objects of Awareness: Due to mix up of kosha and Awareness, Awareness takes itself as body-Awareness, emotions-Awareness, thoughts-Awareness. After after knowing pain/joy/etc are attributes of koshas, and not I — will experiences change? No. Only conclusions about the experiences changes. They’re taking place at level of koshas, not Me.

3. Anantam (Limitless):

1. 1. 1. The word “Anantam” negates all limitations of:
         1. Time (kāla): Meaning satyam-jnanam was never born.
         2. Space (deśa): In usual-limited sense, an object is here but not there. Whereas Brahman/Self is all-pervasive, no place where it's not.
         3. Object (vastu): In usual-limited sense, person is person, and chair is chair. Where person stops, the chair begins. However there is nothing other then Brahman. Person is brahman, the space between person/chair is Brahman, and chair is Brahman.
         4. VIVEKACHUDAMANI'S GOLDEN RULE: Anything that is perceived, changes and depends (meaning it's influenced by another) on something else — is NOT not limitless. Whereas that which can't be perceived as any one particular object, never-changes, and depends on nothing for its existence — is limitless — meaning it is not limited to or confined to anything.
      2. How to show Existence-Awareness (Satyam-Jnanam) is not limited to time:
         1. Time is divisible into smaller units/concepts, which are further perceived. Each unit/concept IS, meaning each depends on presence of Existence-Awareness. EG: 60 seconds experience is. 5 seconds experience is. etc…
         2. Additionally, time is nothing but sense of change. Change (time) can only be known in presence of unchanging substratum.
         3. Furthermore, two versions of exact 5 minutes (300 seconds) of time can change depending on situation. For example, 5-minute dating time is different from 5-minute waiting for bus-stop time. This shows there must be a third principle, not subject to time, or the witness of time, in order to report two versions of same time-units.
      3. How to show Awareness-Existence is not within space – but is the truth of space:
         1. Like time, space too depends on existence. EG: Space is. Little-space is. Lots-of-space is.
         2. Space is an object of Awareness. It can be objectified. For example, between two points is space. 
         3. Space curves, meaning it’s affected by mass of objects. It also means, space depends on mass of objects. Whereas Awareness doesn’t curve.
      4. Even upon knowing Self, you won’t experience yourself as all-pervasive, even though you are all-pervasive: As a metaphor, suppose space is compared to satyam-jnanam. When the space (which thinks it’s enclosed by the cup that looks like a body), understands it is the limitless space, will the cup enclosure collapse? No. The enclosure is recognized to be not real; incidental. It’ll last few more years until physical death.

Discerning the Koshas (Not-I, Relative Knower, Pramata, Jnata, Drasta, Ahamkara, Ego, Reflected Consciousness, Cidabhasa, I-Thought) and the Real “I” (Satyam-Jnanam):

Experiential Exercise:

Close eyes, put attention on elephant, then front of house entrance, then image of your mother.

Notice how the relative knower (ego, I-thought) changes depending on WHAT it knows, and knows for a certain DURATION.

For instance, the relative knower is filled with elephant knowledge for 5 sec, then elephant knowledge vanishes, replaced by house entrance knowledge, etc. While awareness (ever-present Knower) is throughout entire experience — in all objects known, absence of objects, and throughout the relative knower.

Awareness (absolute knower) was in the elephant-knower, in the house-entrance-knower, and in the mother-knower.

Awareness is that which makes change known, meaning it must itself be changeless.

That which makes change known, cannot itself be changing, otherwise change wouldn’t be recognized as change.

Deeper Inquiry Into Relative-Knower vs. Absolute-Knower (Satyam-Jnanam):

Let's take the waking-knower. It knows its house is in Australia, and is good in chess, not in painting, loves dogs, and dislikes loud cars. So the waking-knower has an identity based on those factors.

Then the waking-knower is replaced by a dream-knower. The dream-knower has an entirely different complex from the waking-knower. 

Both knowers believe they are independent, self-existent beings. But in reality, they both depend on presence of the mind. For instance, during deep sleep, mind is absent, thus the waking-knower and dream-knower are resolved.  

Additionally, the knowers depend on the dream and waking state for their existence. The dream state sublates the waking-knower. And the waking state sublates the dream-knower. 

Additionally, the relative knower takes time-bound role. For instance, takes enjoyer-role for 1 min. Sufferer-role for a week. Concerned-role for 10 min. Shy-introvert within group of new people for 1 hour. Confident-warrior within group of friends for 5 hours. Throughout all roles, there’s a non-interfering awareness, an absolute-knower that knows about the relative-knower changing roles.

Self is the light of consciousness that reveals the existence and states of the relative knower (pramātā).

1. 1. In the Waking State: Awareness illumines the experiences of the relative knower (pramātā), including thoughts, emotions, and sensory perceptions.
   2. In the Dream State: Awareness illumines the dream-ego and the entire internally-generated dream world.
   3. In the Deep Sleep State: Awareness illumines the absence of the mind and the world, and the presence of the causal body (ignorance in form of “I didn't know anything”).

Response to “multiple awarenesses” objections from opponents:

The argument goes like this, “I am one awareness. You are another awareness”. Basically, as many people is as many awarenesses. The idea is propounded by: Sankhya, Vishishtadvaita, Dvaita, Nyaya-Vaisheshika.

However Advaita Vedanta counters with, “There aren't many awarenesses. There's only awareness”. 

How does Advaita Vedanta demonstrate this? If nothing sticks to your/my awareness, then both awarenesses are without attributes. Furthermore, this debate comes from poor viveka, inability to distinguish mind from awareness. So what the debater is actually saying is, “My mind, which I mistake for awareness, is different from yours”. 

Conclusion:

1. 1. Awareness is the one invariable constant in all variable experiences (both ordinary and profound). It’s because of which you can say “There was a dream. There was rest. There was nothing”. You are the objectifier of every thought, concern, doubt. In one line affirmation: In presence of I, there is/was experience of “this/that”.
   2. There are many knowers (pramatas). The knower expands/contracts depending what is known. But the principle that enables knowing (or cognition of the mind) is Awareness.

2) “Free from impurities” ^(viśuddham)

Nothing sticks onto Brahman, remains ever itself. Because only what is in relationship can be tainted; Brahman has no second to relate to.

The analogy is that of a movie screen. The screen is “pure” in the sense that it remains completely untouched and unchanged by the dramas, tragedies.

Similarly, Brahman, as pure existence-consciousness, is the “screen” upon which the entire universe of names and forms (nāma-rūpa) is projected by māyā.

3) “Beyond māyā” (paraṁ)

Everything in the world of māyā (your thoughts, senses, and even your mind) – is objectified or revealed by consciousness, doesn’t stick onto consciousness, and depends on consciousness.

NOTE: Brahman and maya aren’t two separate things. Thus you come to understand Brahman through maya (since forms is all you have to work with). You don’t need to break the ornament to get to the gold. Just see their satya-mithya relationship, as will be expounded in the next session.

4) “Happiness not bound by time or degree” ^{(nitya ānanda eka rasam)}

When happiness is experienced as a feeling, it varies by object and occasion. But the śruti calls Brahman – unbroken, changeless joy (nitya-ananda).

When word “ananda” is used in reference to Brahman, it doesn’t mean knowing Brahman produces experiential bliss or exalted mood.

The word “ananda”, when it's used in reference to Brahman, means “fullness”, or not limited to space, time, objects. So it can be equated to word “anantam” (limitless).

Knowing that I am the whole, despite the apparent body-mind upadhi, brings contentment and mental composure knowing nothing real is being injured. If you don’t find contentment, despite knowing your true nature — that’s due to residual likes-dislikes still dictating how reality should be. This is cleared gradually via Nididhyasana.

5) “Always available non-separate from Oneself” ^{(pratyag abhinnam nirantaram Jayati)}

Brahman is described as pratyag-abhinnam (non-separate from oneself) and nirantaram (without interruption).  Meaning Brahman is not a distant goal but your own immediate self. The teaching does not create this reality but helps you recognize what is already and ever-present.

6) “Victorious” (Jayati)

The final word, jayati (it triumphs), signifies non-dual self is ever-victorious, as it is the final reality that remains when all appearances, including death (mṛtyu) had their moment.

7) Result of knowledge:

As you discover your nature is truth of time-space – beginningless seeker-of-truth goes away permanently.

Residual mini-seekers of pleasures may remain due to past impressions, which are resolved through follow up (nididhyasana).

Now you can act more effectively, because no energy is wasted into pursuing goals to fill oneself, to be validated, to be recognized as someone important. What a burden!

Can’t equate liberation to state of mind:

Fullness that you know Self to be, can’t be equated to a state of mind, because nature of mind changes, and is subject to punya/papa.

To equate wise person to state of mind doesn’t make sense, because what makes person wise is knowing “I am free of any state of mind / body”.

Thus you can’t judge a wise person by state of his body or state of mind.

To expect to always be happy after moksha, is showing “I” is still being mixed with ānandamaya.

Summary:

What makes you wise is knowing what is what. Awareness is awareness. Mind is mind.

 

NEXT VERSE: Satya-mithya to help see how koshas and everything resolves into one reality (Satyam-jnanam)…

—

Recorded 12 Jan, 2026