Mandukya_Upanishad

vai tat. The reconciliation of “this” and “that” is done notby a unity of the two meanings of the pronouns “this” and“that”, but a unity of the single object which these twopronouns designate. “This” and “that” do not represent anyobject. They only indicate an object. These are indicativepronouns pointing out to an object, and the unity of theobject is established by discarding the connotation of “that”as well as of “this”. It does not matter if that person wassomewhere else at one time and now he is in another placeat another time; these distinctions make no difference to usin recognising the person. Spatial and temporal differencesare abandoned for the sake of the recognition of the unityof the person who is the same always; then, as well as now,there as well as here. This very method is employed inunderstanding such Upanishadic statements as: sarvamhyetad brahma; ayam ātmā brahma; All this is Brahman;and this Ātman, also, is Brahman. Here you have; as it were,the quintessence of all Upanishadic teaching, the last wordof the Vedānta, as you may call it, the culmination of thewisdom of the sages. This universe which appears to beproximate to our senses is that Brahman which seems to bedistant or away from us, and this personality of ours whichappears to be so proximate is also reconcilable with thatAbsolute which appears to be far from your reach. And,finally, on a consideration of the fact that every individualcan make a reference to oneself as “this” and to Brahman as“that”, and inasmuch as “this” is verily “that”, all “this” alsois “that”. This personality, this individuality, this jīvatva, isultimately unifiable with that Absolute, which is Supreme,but appears to be distant. If every individual is to make an33