Vedanta is not meant for denying the not so pleasant aspects of the psychological personality.
All aspects of the psychological self, including the not-so-pleasant ones, like the anger, the shame, the guilt, the hurt, the jealousy, the greed, the craving, the loneliness, the sense of persecution, the frustration.... its endless - all of pain - both psychological and physical, needs to be admitted to without denial, and healed with compassionate acceptance. It is a sweet tapas....
The cognitive net that Vedanta offers through the vision of the whole self that is free of all objective experience, can make it much easier to admit to the pain and offer it the compassionate acceptance that it is crying out for, and thus allowing the painful heart to heal.
The healed heart, the heart that has opened to accepting all aspects of the psychological self, can much more easily recognize and own up the absolute truth, that the self is indeed free of all pain - has always been free of pain, is always free of pain and will always be free of pain. The self is indeed virajam – untainted, vishuddham – pure, vishadam – clear,
vishokam - ever-free of grief.
But, how can there be knowledge of non-difference between the
jva, the individual, the one with the limiting I-notion (ego), of limited
knowledge; and Ishvara, the Lord, the one who is devoid of ego, who is
all-knowledge, (come about) by the mahavakya ‘That Thou Art’, because the two
are possessed of contradictory qualities?
इतिचेन्न।स्थूलसूक्ष्मशरीराभिमानीत्वंपदवाच्यार्थः।
उपाधिविनिर्मुक्तंसमाधिदशासम्पन्नंशुद्धंचैतन्यं
त्वंपदलक्ष्यार्थः।
It is not so. The immediate meaning of the word ‘thou’ is the one
identified with the gross and subtle bodies. The target meaning of the word ‘thou’
is pure consciousness, the one free from the limiting adjunct (costume), the
one who obtains in a state of samadhi (in which no object is seen).
एवंसर्वज्ञत्वादिविशिष्टईश्वरःतत्पदवाच्यार्थः।
Similarly, the immediate meaning of the word ‘that’ is the Lord,
the one endowed with (attributes like) all knowership etc.
उपाधिशून्यंशुद्धचैतन्यंतत्पदलक्ष्यार्थः।
The target meaning of the word ‘That’ is pure consciousness, free
from the limiting adjuncts (costume).
एवंचजीवेश्वरयोचैतन्यरूपेणाऽभेदेबाधकाभावः।
Thus, between the jiva, the individual, and Ishvara, the Lord,
because there is no difference in the form of consciousness, there is no
difference.
And in this manner, those for whom the vision of Brahman in all
beings is born through the sentences of Vedanta, by the teaching of a Guru,
they are jivanmuktas, liberated while living.
Just as how (generally before knowledge of the self one has ) the
firm conclusion ‘I am the body, I am a man, I am a brahmana, I am a sudra etc,’
so too, the one who has clear knowledge, I am , ‘I am not a brahmana, nor a
shudra, nor a man, but I am unattched, of the nature of existence,
consciousness, fullness, effulgent, one who is abiding in all beings, of the
form of consciousness (limitless like space)’ is a jivanmukta, a man of firm,
abiding, immediate knowledge (knowledge not mediated by sensory perception).
This is very lucid clear book by my Guru Pujya Swami Dayananda Saraswati, that I recommend for all serious long-term students and teachers of Vedanta. This is because the teaching tradition of Vedanta is as important as even its vision of oneness - because the vision is dependent on the method of handling the words unfolding the vision.
You can buy the book both Kindle Version or a paperback on Amazon.
When there is not an adequate study of Vedanta under a traditional teacher of Vedanta, there is no understanding of the highly sophisticated methodology of 'lakshana vritti' used in the mahavakyas like 'Tat Tvam Asi'.
Modern teachers of Vedanta of the so called 'Direct Path' who have not been exposed perhaps to the rigorous methodology of the teaching of Vedanta can sometimes do a disservice to Vedanta by claiming that statements like 'Tat Tvam Asi', 'Ayam Atma Brahma', are a subtle form of ignorance because there is no 'That' there is only 'I'. They only display their ignorance of the methodology used in Vedanta. It a great pity that these popular 'Direct Path' teachers spread this kind of misinformation.
They miss the point totally that 'Tat Tvam Asi' is an equation much like (5+4) = (11-2) revealing the identity of what is taken to be a limited individual, to be identical to the limitless whole.... that there is a methodology used to reveal the identity which does not use the direct meaning of the words - but rather uses the implied meaning. The equation 'Tat Tvam Asi' is a means of knowledge culminating in the direct and immediate recognition of the limited 'I' to be the limitless whole.
I would invite these "Direct Path' teachers to undergo a study of traditional Vedanta, rather than pass on misinformation.
Does the seeming existence of this projected empirical reality, deny the non-duality of consciousness? It cannot.
Does the weight of the body contradict the nonduality of consciousness? Can it? It cannot.
Sensations felt do not contradict the nonduality of consciousness. Sensations are apparently made of consciousness, they seemingly arise in changeless consciousness, as seemingly sustained in it and they seemingly resolve in consciousness.
In the same manner the presence of the body and its weight also does not contradict the non-duality of consciousness.
The understanding of two orders of reality should be clear. Not two realities - two orders of reality. We do need to posit two orders of reality to account for the empirical reality. Consciousness is the absolute reality, changeless and infinite. The empirical reality we live in is projected and dependent on the absolute reality - it can never limit consciousness because it is never separate from consciousness.
The presence of wave does not contradict the nonduality of water, in and thru the ocean, the tap water, the gutter water.
The presence of ornaments do not contradict the nonduality of gold in and thru all ornaments of gold.
The presence of the movie does not contradict its truth the movie screen that sustains it.
Study of traditional Advaita from traditional teachers is a must - otherwise errors in understanding take place.
