The very idea of liberation arises because bondage exists in life. Darkness exists, which means light too exists. Philosophy tells us that bondage is ignorance or delusion. Here, ignorance does not mean 'not knowing,' 'lack of knowledge,' or 'absence of external consciousness.' We simply do not know—who we are, what we are like, where we are, and this not knowing itself is ignorance. This is why we are ignorant. In Vedanta, this ignorance is called false perception—it is also a perception or knowledge, but a false or mistaken one; not true or authentic.
Suppose you have never eaten horse meat. You do not know what it tastes like, and you know that you do not know the taste of that meat. This means you know about this inexperience. This knowing of yours is also knowledge, but it is ignorance (knowing about not knowing) or false knowledge. To dispel it, you must attempt to eat horse meat. This attempt is called practice, and as false knowledge or ignorance is destroyed, true knowledge reveals itself, and the state of mind at that moment is called liberation. Liberation dwells in the mind—it must be sought and found there.
In philosophical doctrine, two forms of this liberation are described—liberation in life and liberation beyond the body. The blessing of liberation received while the body still lives is called jivanmukti—liberation while living. That liberation which comes after the body perishes, as one determines truth through philosophical inquiry, is called videhamukti, liberation beyond the body. Among the interpreters of philosophy, only a few acknowledge the existence of videhamukti. Only a handful of scriptural authorities such as Mandana Mishra, author of the Brahmasiddhi, and the great sage Sarvajnatma, author of the Sankhepashariraka, recognize videhamukti as true liberation. Their reasoning is this: the Gita mentions one of steady wisdom and fixed in Brahman, and though according to many he is recognized as liberated and a knower of Brahman, ultimately true liberation or bondlessness is that which comes only after the destruction of the physical body. Therefore, a person of steady wisdom is none other than an advanced practitioner. The Gita's person of steady wisdom is an accomplished aspirant at a higher stage. The knowledge he attains after the body's destruction, while journeying on the path of truth-determination, is true liberation itself.
Even after a great soul abandons his body, his deeds and ideals persist in the world. People revere him, offer their devotion, worship him as a god. The search for truth—walking that path—is an endless journey, as if it has no end. He whose heart is bound by the bond of truth—for him, the end of his bodily journey comes only in death. After the physical death of great souls, their spiritual birth seems to unfold perpetually in fresh consciousness among humanity. Such liberation comes to them truly only after the body's dissolution. Attaining such supreme knowledge is possible only for the indestructible soul; the perishable body cannot grasp it. Before physical death, the soul does not taste final knowledge or the sweetness of liberation.
Āchārya Śaṅkara and the majority of Śaṅkara's commentarial successors do not accept such a notion of liberation. Śaṅkara has stated clearly: "Moreover, there is no room for dispute here—whether one who has attained true knowledge of Brahman retains the body or not is not a matter for debate or investigation" (Brahma Sutra Bhāṣya, 4-1-15). Knowledge of Brahman can be obtained while the body still endures—Śaṅkara has explicitly acknowledged this truth. Padmapāda, Prakāśātmayati, Vācaspati Miśra, Madhusūdan Sarasvatī and other ācāryās accepted Śaṅkara's doctrine as true. Moreover, modern spiritual teachers and ācāryās—Ramakrishna Dev, Swami Vivekananda, Swami Abhedananda, Sri Aurobindo, Sri Nigamananda, Sri Anirvana, Sri Ramana Maharshi, Mahavira, Gautama Buddha, Adi Shankaracharya, the sādhak Jnaneshwar, the bhakta Kabir, Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, Swaminarayan and other spiritual practitioners—have all acknowledged the experience of jivanmukti. The introduction of videhamukti holds no meaning for them.
'Jivanmukti' (liberation-in-life) is 'becoming liberated while living.' One who has attained complete self-knowledge and self-realization according to Vedantic philosophy, and who has achieved kaivalya or moksha (consciousness and liberation)—such a person is jivanmukta. Liberation in this living state—according to Vedanta, Yoga, and other schools of Hindu philosophy, this is the goal of moksha, and it is called jivanmukti, or liberation, or enlightenment.
The jivanmukta is also called a brahmajnani or atmajanani, for they know their true self (atman) and the universal self. Toward the end of their lives, the jivanmukta destroys the residual fruits of past actions and attains paramukti (ultimate liberation). When a jivanmukta imparts their inner vision to others, teaches them about ultimate reality (Brahman) and the true nature of the self or atman, and assumes the role of a guru in showing others the path to moksha, such a jivanmukta is called an avadhuta. Some avadhutas attain the title of 'paramahansa.' When a rishi (a seer) becomes jivanmukta, that rishi is called a brahmarshi (a rishi of Brahman-knowledge).
Sadhaks who are jivanmukta journey along the path of pure spirituality and realize the atman—that is, God—in their very lifetime. By attaining knowledge, self-realization, God-realization, jivanmukti, self-knowledge (all these words are synonymous), they have reached the state of the siddha purusha. To attain the state of jivanmukti, they have renounced all worldly actions in emptiness. After gaining knowledge, they retained their bodies to spread wisdom among the masses. Only upon the dissolution of the body do they attain paramukti—supreme liberation.
The conflict between knowledge of Brahman and ordinary worldly knowledge does not lie in the knowing itself, but in what is known. When we think about a book, two things occur: First, we come to know the book through its distinctive characteristics—what it says, its form and appearance, whether it is better or worse than many other books (in our estimation and judgment), and many other such facts of knowledge we acquire. Second, everything we come to know about the book becomes incorporated into our larger knowledge, and we cannot possibly separate the knowledge of that book from the comprehensive form of our interior knowledge, for here knowledge is not fragmented; rather, the known and the knower together express themselves in the completeness of a supreme Brahman. In the first of these two occurrences, worldly knowledge is attained; in the second, knowledge of Brahman. Knowledge itself is one and identical, yet the manner of its manifestation, extension, and preservation differs.
Now the question arises: if Brahman or knowledge of Brahman does not depend upon the object of knowledge, then why should Brahman be the object of knowledge of Brahman? Wherever there is an object, there must necessarily be a subject; and subject-object knowledge is merely another name for dualistic knowledge marked by distinction. By this logic, then, is not knowledge of Brahman itself dualistic knowledge?
Let me elaborate. Because we hold Brahman within our knowledge, here knowledge becomes the container and Brahman the contained. According to non-dualistic philosophy, knowledge of Brahman means this: Brahman is knowledge and knowledge is Brahman; here knowledge and Brahman merge into a single reality—this is not knowledge marked by the relation of container and contained, and therefore in its examination, the question of object and subject does not arise. Knowledge of Brahman is not dualistic, but non-dualistic. Yet such reasoning could be applied to worldly knowledge.
Knowledge of Brahman is mere realization or ascertainment of truth. Here the seeker desirous of knowledge does not apprehend it as an object separate from himself through the triadic manifestation of knowledge—that is, by knowing the particular or distinctive characteristics or functions of that object—there is no relation of knower and known, or container and contained in the path or method of attaining knowledge of Brahman; there exists only awareness or knowledge. This knowledge itself is true perception, which grasps only that which 'is'—the relative form of 'is' that arises when bound up with space, time, the nature of things, cause, and determination (what constitutes relative existence or presence) is not this knowledge; rather it is the form of 'is' as realization, or merely the form of 'remains' integrated with vast knowledge.
Knowledge of Brahman is not dualistic, but non-dualistic knowledge, unrelated to worldly relations. Yet if the fundamental contradiction, difference, or distance between one knowledge and another lies precisely in what is known—how is the truth of this very statement proven?
All conflicts and contradictions can be reconciled only from the standpoint of worldly knowledge, not from that of transcendent knowledge. When we distinguish Brahmic knowledge from other forms of worldly knowledge, we do so through earthly perception and intellectual reasoning. Accepting maya, or creation, these differences are established—yet in the state beyond maya or creation, where no distinction whatsoever exists, where only singular, non-dual knowledge abides, all manner of difference, characteristic, variation in nature, the multiplicity of knowledge—all vanish and appear instead as unified manifestations within one vast, undivided Being. The moment maya or illusion arrives, non-duality withdraws and duality emerges.
Our knowledge of the banyan tree is marked by distinction in its subject matter—the banyan is what other trees are not; thus knowing what qualities the banyan possesses or lacks, what manner of thing it is or is not, all such inquiry aids us in the path of acquiring worldly knowledge about the banyan. Such knowledge is knowledge of distinction. When countless forms of such distinctive knowledge merge with our self, our consciousness, or the Supreme Brahman, these fragmented knowledges no longer present themselves separately but become available as a single, unified, whole knowledge—we call the ocean simply the ocean; we do not name it by the rivers that have flowed into it, nor do we recognize it through their separate identities. Here the rivers represent knowledge of distinction, and the ocean represents knowledge of non-distinction.
The Chandogya Upanishad declares that earth alone is real—the various objects fashioned from earth are known by different names, yet the origin of all is earth. When some new earthen object is created, it too receives a new name. That is to say, these worldly identities are not eternal but fleeting; not true but fabricated. Contemplating worldly knowledge and Brahmic knowledge together, we perceive that the first is false, the second true; the first is lower knowledge, the second higher knowledge; the first varies with each circumstance, the second remains one and identical in all circumstances; the first is partial, the second whole; the first is the countless streams of a river, the second the totality and confluence of all streams into the ocean; the first is changeable and transient, the second eternal and perpetual; the first is external knowledge, the second the knowledge of self.
At the outset, we undertake inquiry only by accepting a thing as distinct—holding distinctions such as high and low, worldly and transcendent, eternal and transient, good and evil. In such thinking, we are accompanied by our experience, knowledge, belief, conviction, and related faculties. So long as Brahmic knowledge has not yet become Brahmic knowledge, it remains subject to inquiry. In that phase, it is lower knowledge, worldly knowledge, or conceptual knowledge. This is the initial stage of Brahmic knowledge. Before becoming whole, it must first be partial. To reach the transcendent, one must hold the hand of the lower.
When the seeker—through "Ayam Atma Brahma" (my self abides in the foundation of Brahman); "Aham Brahmasmi" (I am Brahman, or I am the ultimate); "Tat Tvam Asi" (the non-duality of two differently qualified or attributed aspects of Brahman, established in the 'I'); "Sarvam Khalvida Brahma" (all of this is Brahman); "Sarvam Khalu Brahmamayana Idam Jagat" (this entire animate and inanimate universe is permeated by Brahman)—when the seeker grasps these Upanishadic utterances in their hidden depths, then by non-duality they understand the vision of Brahman in all beings. After examining the true nature of Tat and Tvam, or Jiva and Brahman, the seeker in the first stage considers himself as Brahman, Atma, or Consciousness ("Aham Brahmasmi"), and in the next stage places all other objects, beings, and concepts within the same understanding ("Sarvam Khalvida Brahma"). After this process, the seeker perceives no distinction between himself and his surrounding world. It is then that true unity or connection with everything in the universe arises—that faculty of perception, discernment, intellect, and mind which sees oneself identical with all beings.
"Isavasyam Idam Sarvam Yat Kincha Jagatyam Jagat" (All that exists in this world is pervaded by the Lord from beginning to end)—this eternal mantra from the Isha Upanishad is the foundational incantation of our practice of non-duality or oneness. This non-duality is metaphysical, not pragmatic. It does not mean something like: all are human, therefore all are equal; or all cows are cows, therefore all cows are one. Rather, it means: all inert and sentient beings are Brahman, and therefore all are one and identical—they are but individual fragments of one complete knowledge, yet they are not perceived as fragments but as the totality itself.
In pragmatic knowledge, difference is real—where then is non-duality? Everything that is perceptible to the senses establishes only difference, never oneness. Difference in color and form is the life of the eye—without it, perception of form would be impossible. Difference in sound and rhythm is the life of the ear—without it, hearing would be impossible. The distinction between cold and heat establishes the sense of touch. Without the difference between sweet, bitter, salty, and savory, what work would the tongue have? All the senses are founded upon difference. One cannot reach non-duality without first arriving at the realm of this very difference. First one must become proficient in objective knowledge, must establish the practical world through reflection and meditation. Here, the victory cry belongs to difference alone.
When all knowledge of difference merges into Consciousness, then there is no longer any distinction between Brahman and the world—the world becomes suffused with Brahman, Brahman spreads throughout the universe; there is no longer any difference between the object and the subject. And in order to elevate oneself to this state, the seeker must first, with the aid of the senses, come to understand the outer and practical aspects of dualistic and worldly knowledge through the knowledge of difference. Unless one first acquires lower knowledge, one cannot even turn toward higher knowledge—indeed, it becomes difficult to live healthily at all.
Liberation is never produced; liberation is the natural and spontaneous expression of self-knowledge. The light of liberation does not shine forth through anything or by means of anything—the light of liberation always shines. It is we who, through ignorance, fail to perceive it. We alone are responsible for this failure of perception; our conditioning alone is responsible. Philosophy calls this conditioning "Maya"—that whose existence cannot be measured or determined, that which both exists and does not exist—this very ambiguity of being and non-being often throws us into delusion. This is why Acharya Shankara says in the Vivekachudamani:
The Unnamed Power of the Supreme, Beginningless Maya, Threefold in Quality, Transcendent.
Knowable through the Effect—the wise perceive Her thus. From Her springs all this world. (108)
Its meaning: Maya, or ignorance, is the power of Brahman. She is also called the Unmanifest. She is without beginning; composed of the three qualities—sattva, rajas, and tamas—and is the cause. From the effect that is creation, the keen-minded perceive Her existence through inference. From this Maya springs all the world.
He calls this indefinable Maya "knowable through the effect": in her own nature she does not exist, yet her effects exist—for she exerts influence upon us, and it is through this that we come to know of Maya's reality. The scriptures and the seers of scripture say that man is knowledge itself. And yet here we conduct ourselves as though ignorant. Why is this so? Because of Maya. Only when true discrimination of our own nature flowers into noble wisdom can the light of discernment reveal to us our error and false knowledge. And the moment we understand it, the path to its dissolution opens before us, and thus the manifestation of knowledge occurs. Vedanta teaches that the destruction of ignorance—the dispelling of the veil or the end of not-knowing—and the manifestation of knowledge happen simultaneously.
The destruction of ignorance is the manifestation of knowledge. When clouds veil the sun, darkness spreads everywhere. When the clouds part, light returns. This re-manifestation of the sun is not a new creation, but rather the removal of that which stood as obstacle and veil—the clouds themselves. Just so, the manifestation of knowledge of Brahman means the destruction or correction of delusion, falsehood, and ignorance. Only after this destruction comes the manifestation of true, pure, and complete knowledge. The fruit of such manifestation is self-knowledge, or liberation-in-life. Such liberation, like a sun hidden by clouds, lies veiled within our hearts beneath the coverings of falsehood and delusion, concealed behind reason and awareness. Therefore, the attainment of liberation and the attainment of knowledge of Brahman mean one and the same thing.
Yet from the standpoint of true discrimination, man is neither bound nor free; for bondage and freedom are mutually dependent—if one exists, the other must be imagined as obstacle or obstruction to its existence. For this reason, the Master Shankaracharya spoke of Brahman and knowledge of Brahman as transcending bondage and freedom, free from duality and non-duality—a strange kingdom it is; only those who enter it truly understand what it is like; the rest merely spin webs of imagination. In the realm of practice and ignorance, duality exists, non-duality exists; bondage exists, freedom exists; scriptural examination exists, doctrinal disputation exists—determining who is right at what moment, which path is to be embraced or rejected, proves exceedingly difficult!
Only the fortunate seeker who has truly experienced Brahman understands that the substance of Brahman is neither dual nor non-dual—Brahman is not the subject of dualism, nor the attainment of non-dualism—Brahman is such an experience that only by reaching it can one sense what it is, cannot be known through intellect or learning. The work of intellect is to unveil knowledge (as the sun emerges when clouds scatter) and then to determine its nature and movement. Once this purpose is fulfilled, the intellect—stripped of its functions and conditioning—transforms into pure knowing. A mind submerged in illusion is the chief obstacle to liberation, while a mind of truth and purity is the guide on the path to freedom. To know Brahman, one needs an intellect and mind enriched with knowledge; to experience Brahman, one needs an intellect and mind purified by truth.
Man is inherently free—to know this, to become conscious of it, is his fundamental work. It is for this very knowing that there exist so many scriptures, so much inquiry, so much philosophy, so many spiritual paths, so much practice. Around this single liberation have arisen countless doctrines. Each of these doctrines is a way of understanding ultimate truth—across the ages, countless saints, spiritual teachers, and founders of faiths, each having tasted liberation in their own manner, have shown the path to attain that same liberation, that same Brahman, in the way they themselves knew it.
To judge which of these paths is right and which is wrong is impossible for us, because we have not yet reached ultimate truth ourselves—if we could reach it, we would see that here there is no judgment of truth and falsehood—it is a pure experience, beyond explanation and description, to which one can only bow in the silence of wordless offering. That sacred place is called liberation, which stands far beyond all logic, argument, pride, jealousy, dispute, belief, and conditioning.