Non-difference is the nearest English translation of the Sanskrit word abheda, meaning non-existence of difference. In Vedanta philosophy this word plays a vital role in explaining the indicatory mark in respect of the unity of the individual self with the Infinite or Brahman. [1]
Audolomi (Brahma Sutra I.iv.21) is believed to have held the view that the individual self differs from the supreme self while it possesses a body, but when a man obtains the clear knowledge by means of practice and meditation, dies, leaves the body and obtains complete liberation, the individual self becomes the supreme self, which means in liberation, there is no difference; in transmigration, there is difference; the absolutely different individual self becomes identical in the state of liberation. This is the non-identity non-difference theory of Audolomi. [2] However, Kasakrtsna (Brahma Sutra I.iv.22) believed that the very supreme self exists as the individual soul without undergoing any change which view-point is supported by Badarayana when he reiterates that the individual is only an apparent part of the partless Brahman; the difference is imaginary. This is the non-duality non-difference theory of Kasakrtsna. In his commentary on the Brahma Sutra II.i.14 Adi Sankara explains that the difference between the 'experiencer' and the 'things experienced' which is observed in common experience, in reality does not exist, there is non-difference of cause and effect for all things are merely modifications, and "a modification has speech as its origin and exists only in name" (Chandogya Upanishad VI.i.4), and "All this has That as its essence; That is the Reality; That is the Self; That thou art" (Chandogya Upanishad Vi.vii.7); "All this is but the Self" (Chandogya Upanishad VII.xxv.2). Difference commonly observed is the creation of ignorance whereas non-difference is natural; when the individual ignorance is destroyed through knowledge unity with Self is attained – "Anyone who knows that supreme Brahman becomes Brahman indeed" (Mundaka Upanishad III.ii.9), "Being but Brahman, he is absorbed in Brahman" (Brhadaranyaka Upanishad IV.iv.6). [3]
In Hindu philosophy according to the Doctrine of Non-difference (abheda) there is no difference (bheda) whatsoever between the individual self (atman) and the supreme Self (Paramatman) or (Brahman). The opinion of the Sruti is that the knowledge of oneness of Brahman and atman is samyag-jnana ( Vivekachudamani. 204). The word ekatvam in this sloka that reads - brahmatmaikatvavijnanam samyajjnanam sruter matam means "non-difference", the experience of this non-difference between Brahman (supreme Self) and atman (individual self) is samyag-jnana. It is the person tainted by bhrama ("delusion") and pramada ("carelessness") who cannot determine what is samyag-jnana or "true knowledge". Right knowledge removes all products of ajnana ("ignorance"); ajnana is of the nature of Mithya, hinting differences between atman and Brahman. [4] Then, all phenomenal expressions imagined on Brahman are denied and Brahman stands out as outside the negation Neti neti.
According to the Theory of the Pre-existent Effect, there is no annihilation of the existence, nor is there any creation of the non-existent, which means, there cannot be anything new or the destruction of what exists; and that there is no relation between cause and effect. With regard to the non-difference of the cause and the effect the general views are that, a) the difference (negation of non-difference) of the cause and effect is the essence (swarupa) of the cause and the effect, and the non-difference of them is their relation of identity; b) that difference of cause and effect is their essential quality and that their non-difference is the negation of that difference, and c) that both difference and non-difference are essential qualities of the cause and effect and are equally positive in character and colour. These views lead to the reasoning that non-difference of the cause and effect cannot be taken as absolutely different from them, non-difference is not an attribute different from cause and effect and if difference is interpreted as constituting the essential nature of the cause and effect, with non-difference qualifying it as an attribute then a rational conception of the relation between cause and effect cannot be formed. It is held that the effect before its manifestation remains undifferentiated in the cause, because the causal substance is the substance of the effect as a substance therefore, the effect cannot be different from the cause, it evolves out of the cause, it exists inseparable from the cause and at the time of destruction it merges in the nature of the cause. Also, specific features that constitute the effect are not different from the cause. Thus, the entire world which prior to its manifestation is existent in an unmanifest state in the nature of Prakrti, the Primal Energy, the modification of Prakrti resulting in the perceivable world does not make it lose its identity. [5] Existence is a manifestation of the unmanifest Brahman, and the individual souls (atman) are the reflections of Brahman and non-different from Brahman, but even then non-difference cannot become the content of awareness without reference to difference. To the Advaitins, non-difference is real and it is not known through reasoning. Brahman is then held to be knowable because it is different from empirical things. [6]
Non-difference is the essential (svabhavika) condition - He who knows the highest Brahman becomes Brahman Himself [7] and Being Brahman he goes to Brahman, [8] while the distinction of souls from Brahman and each other is due to their limiting adjuncts (internal organs, sense-organs and the body), and the Upadhis that are produced, in accordance with the actions of the individual souls, as essentially non-different and different from Brahman. [9] Advaitins maintain the view that there is complete undividedness (akhandata) or identity (tadatmya) of the individual soul and Brahman; the former is the latter limited by artificial conditions (upadhis). According to Vijnanabhikshu, difference (bheda) and non-difference (abheda) can also be understood to mean separation (vibhaga) and non-separation (avibhaga).e.g. pure water poured into pure water. The statements that reject difference have as their concern difference in the sense of non-separation. [10] As regards the difference in the sense of non-separation Brihadaranyaka Upanishad explains that the essence of that which is gross, mortal, limited and defined is the eye for it is the essence of the defined which means, the mental mode associated with comparison that gives rise to duality and multiplicity i.e. separateness, is connected with the eye. The essence of that which is subtle, immortal, unlimited, unchanging and undefined is the unseeable being that is in the right-eye. Similarly the defined is the Sun but the undefined is that which moves within the Sun. [11]
With regard the meaning of Brahma Sutra II.i.15 which reads bhave cha uplabhdheha, Adi Shankara explains that it means - the effect is non-different from the cause for this further reason, that the effect is perceived when the cause is there, but not otherwise, it also means that not only is the non-difference of the cause and effect to be accepted on the authority of scriptures, their non-difference is also to be accepted on the strength of the existence of such a perception; for direct perception does occur about the non-difference of the cause and effect. And, with regard the interpretation of Brahma Sutra III.ii.22, Adi Shankara explains that neither the form of Brahman consisting of the phenomenal manifestations can be denied, nor Brahman, the possessor of form, for that would lead to nihilism. And that the unreal can only be denied on the basis of something real. Since the Sruti insists that Brahman is to be realized as existing [12] failing to reach which, words turn back with the mind ( [13] it is the phenomenal expression alone of Brahman is denied and not Brahman which appears to be different during activity, yet intrinsically there is non-difference, mark the Mahavakya, Tat tvam asi [14] and the Sruti vakya, There is no other witness but Him. The individual self, which is non-different from the supreme Self i.e. Brahman, does not become liberated so long as it persists to be by nature an agent and experience when at the same time that its identity with Brahman, realizable through knowledge, does not exist “because when there is duality, as it were, then one sees something” “but when to the knower of Brahman everything has become the Self, then what should one see and through what?” [15] [16]
The Upanishads are late Vedic Sanskrit texts of religious teaching and ideas still revered in Hinduism. They are the most recent part of the oldest scriptures of Hinduism, the Vedas, that deal with meditation, philosophy, and ontological knowledge; other parts of the Vedas deal with mantras, benedictions, rituals, ceremonies, and sacrifices. Among the most important literature in the history of Indian religions and culture, the Upanishads played an important role in the development of spiritual ideas in ancient India, marking a transition from Vedic ritualism to new ideas and institutions. Of all Vedic literature, the Upanishads alone are widely known, and their central ideas are at the spiritual core of Hinduism.
Ātman is a Sanskrit word that means inner self, spirit, or soul. In Hindu philosophy, especially in the Vedanta school of Hinduism, Ātman is the first principle: the true self of an individual beyond identification with phenomena, the essence of an individual. In order to attain Moksha (liberation), a human being must acquire self-knowledge. For the different schools of thought, self-realization is that one's true self (Jīvātman) and the ultimate reality (Brahman) are: completely identical, completely different, or simultaneously non-different and different.
Vedanta or Uttara Mīmāṃsā is one of the six (āstika) schools of Hindu philosophy. Literally meaning "of the Vedas", Vedanta reflects ideas that emerged from, or were aligned with, the speculations and philosophies contained in the Upanishads, specifically, knowledge and liberation. Vedanta contains many sub-traditions on basis of a common textual connection called the Prasthanatrayi: the Upanishads, the Brahma Sutras and the Bhagavad Gita.
Yajnavalkya or Yagyavlkya was a Hindu Vedic sage. He is mentioned in the Upanishads, and likely lived in the Videha region of ancient India, approximately between the 8th century BCE, and the 7th century BCE. Yajnavalkya is considered one of the earliest philosophers in recorded history. Yajnavalkya proposes and debates metaphysical questions about the nature of existence, consciousness and impermanence, and expounds the epistemic doctrine of neti neti to discover the universal Self and Ātman. His ideas for renunciation of worldly attachments have been important to Hindu sannyasa traditions.
Advaita Vedānta is a school of Hindu philosophy, and is a classic system of spiritual realization in Indian tradition. The term Advaita refers to the idea that Brahman alone is ultimately real, the phenomenal transient world is an illusory appearance (maya) of Brahman, and the true self, atman, is not different from Brahman.
Vishishtadvaita is one of the most popular schools of the Vedanta school of Hindu philosophy. Vedanta literally means the end of the Vedas.VishishtAdvaita is a non-dualistic school of Vedanta philosophy. It is non-dualism of the qualified whole, in which Brahman alone exists, but is characterized by multiplicity. It can be described as qualified monism or qualified non-dualism or attributive monism. It is a school of Vedanta philosophy which believes in all diversity subsuming to an underlying unity.
The Brahma Sūtras is a Sanskrit text, attributed to the sage Badarayana or sage Vyasa, estimated to have been completed in its surviving form in approx. 400-450 CE, while the original version might be ancient and composed between 500 BCE and 200 BCE. The text systematizes and summarizes the philosophical and spiritual ideas in the Upanishads. Brahmaasutra synthesized the diverse and sometimes conflicting teachings of Upanishads by arguing, as John Koller states: "that Brahman and Atman are, in some respects, different, but, at the deepest level, non-different (advaita), being identical." It is one of the foundational texts of the Vedānta school of Hindu philosophy.
In Hindu philosophy, turiya or chaturiya, chaturtha, is pure consciousness. Turiya is the background that underlies and pervades the three common states of consciousness. The three common states of consciousness are: waking state, dreaming state, and dreamless deep sleep.
The Chandogya Upanishad is a Sanskrit text embedded in the Chandogya Brahmana of the Sama Veda of Hinduism. It is one of the oldest Upanishads. It lists as number 9 in the Muktika canon of 108 Upanishads.
A jivan mukta or mukta is someone who, in the Advaita Vedanta philosophy of Hinduism, has gained and assimilated infinite and divine knowledge and power and gained complete self-knowledge and self-realisation and attained kaivalya or moksha, thus is liberated with an inner sense of freedom while living and not yet died. The state is the aim of moksha in Advaita Vedanta, Yoga and other schools of Hinduism, and it is referred to as Jivanmukti.
The Mahavakyas are "The Great Sayings" of the Upanishads, as characterized by the Advaita school of Vedanta. Most commonly, Mahavakyas are considered four in number,
Maitreyi was an Indian philosopher who lived during the later Vedic period in ancient India. She is mentioned in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad as one of two wives of the Vedic sage Yajnavalkya; he is estimated to have lived around the 8th century BCE. In the Hindu epic Mahabharata and the Gṛhyasūtras, however, Maitreyi is described as an Advaita philosopher who never married. In ancient Sanskrit literature, she is known as a brahmavadini.
Brahman, connotes the highest Universal Principle, the Ultimate Reality in the universe. In major schools of Hindu philosophy, it is the material, efficient, formal and final cause of all that exists. It is the pervasive, infinite, eternal truth and bliss which does not change, yet is the cause of all changes. Brahman as a metaphysical concept refers to the single binding unity behind diversity in all that exists in the universe.
Upadesasahasri (Upadeśasāhasri), which literally means "a thousand teachings", is an 8th-century CE Sanskrit text of Adi Shankara. Considered a Prakaraṇa grantha, the Upadesasahasri is considered among Shankara's most important non-commentarial works.
Paramananda is a compound Sanskrit word composed of two words, Parama and Ānanda. Parma is usually taken to mean the Highest, the utmost or the most excellent, but actually means - "beyond". And Ānanda, which means, happiness and bliss and most often used to refer to joy though it does not exactly mean these because the original meaning implies permanence rather than just a momentary surge of delight or happiness; it also suggests a deep-seated spiritual emotion that is solidly entrenched. The Upanishadic Seers have used the word, Ānanda, to denote Brahman, the limitless, formless, infinite, indestructible, sole eternal Supreme Being or Sole Reality, to mean, Brahmanmayah, i.e. full of Brahman.
Tajjalān is one of the few enigmatic methods in Hinduism employed by the Upanishadic seers to describe Reality or Brahman. It is a cosmological approach to the problem of Reality in the context of creation etc.
Viraj, a word in the Sanskrit language, indicates sovereignty, excellence or splendour. Viraj is the mythical primeval being associated with creation who is often personified as the secondary creator.
In Advaita Vedanta and Jnana Yoga Nididhyasana is profound and repeated meditation on the mahavakyas, great Upanishadic statements such as "That art Thou", to realize the identity of Atman and Brahman. It is the fourth step in the training of a sisya (disciple), consisting of preparatory practices, listening to the teachings as contained in the sruti, reflection on the teachings, and nididhyasana.
Jivatva means – the state of life or the state of the individual soul. Jivatva is the state of life of the Jiva, the living entity, which is a particular manifestation of Atman, the embodied being limited to psycho-physical states, and the source of avidya that suffers (repeated) transmigration as result of its actions. Until ignorance ceases the Jiva remains caught in experience of the results of actions bringing merit and demerit, and in the state of individuality (jivatva), and so long as the connection with the intellect as conditioning adjunct lasts, so long the individuality and transmigration of soul lasts.
Madhu-vidya is described in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad II.v.1-19, and in the Chandogya Upanishad III 1-5. Madhu-vidya or 'Honey-knowledge' is that of the supreme Bliss of the Self; it is an important Vedic teaching. This knowledge is meant to be communicated by the teacher to the disciple, by father to the son – who is worthy and inwardly ready. Indra taught Madhu-vidya to Rishi Dadhichi with a warning that it should not be communicated to anyone else.
