In his commentary on Gaudapada’s Karika in the book The Manduka Upanishad: With Gaudapada’s Karika and Sankara’s Commentary, Swami Nikhilananda, en passant, sneaks in a real doozy of a remark:

This Karika tells us that the chief duty of the student [of Advaita Vedanta] is to analyze the law of causality and find its illusory nature. The attainment of true knowledge solely depends upon this understanding of the causal law. (p. 270, my emphasis).

To your ears, that may sound either like a real whopper–or like a dry-as-bone statement. I’d say that it’s actually a real whopper. Allow me to elaborate.

The nondual teaching could be said to boil down to the following proposition (by Parmenides): “Being is; non-being is not.” But if that’s true, then there’s no room for any object coming into being or thus for any object going out of being. Therefore, there’s no room for causation or destruction.

What does this mean? It means that the world, separate selves, and karma are all non-existent.

How could one know this? Let’s explore!

Is There A Cause Of Consciousness?

1. Go to your direct experience of simply being conscious. Then ask, “Is there, in my direct experience, any evidence for a cause of being conscious?” No.

2. Then there’s no cause of consciousness. Consciousness is–or being is.

Is Consciousness The Cause Of The World?

1. In direct experience, the world is nothing but perception.

2. Since 1 is true, take–for instance–seeing. Is consciousness the cause of seeing? Look! You’ll find that the answer is no.

3. The same holds for hearing, touching, tasting, and smelling.

4. Besides (a second reason), consciousness is never at a distance from, e.g., seeing. There’s only one seamless experience here. Then how can one experience be a cause of itself? It can’t.

5. Therefore (for both reasons), consciousness is not the cause of the world.

Is Consciousness The Cause Of Separate Selves?

1. In direct experience, the separate self is nothing but an I-thought.

2. Therefore, let any I-thought arise. E.g., “I am alone,” “I am sitting here,” “I am thinking.”

3. Ask yourself, “In my direct experience, do I find any evidence for consciousness causing this I-thought to appear?” No.

4. Besides (a second reason), consciousness is never at a distance from any I-thought. There’s only one seamless experience here. Then how can one experience be a cause of itself? It can’t.

5. Therefore (for both reasons), consciousness is not the cause of any separate self. In fact, no separate self exists.

Is Consciousness The Cause Of Karma?

1. Karma pertains to actions. We don’t need a sophisticated theory of karma in order to explore it. It’s enough to know that actions are in quesiton.

2. Take any action such as moving your finger. Then ask yourself, “Do I find that consciousness is the cause of this movement or action?” No. Then that’s it! How can there be a chain of actions (not the least, one attributable to an agent) if there’s no cause of action in the first place?

3. Action or movement is just arising. In what? In consciousness. How far is consciousness from action or movement? Look: no distance at all.

4. Then how can consciousness be the cause of action when there’s no relationship between the two? That is, when there’s only identity here? There can’t be!

5. Therefore, conciousness is not the cause of karma, and karma is non-existent.

*

Consciousness, itself uncaused, is not the cause of anything. No object ever comes into being; no object ever comes out of being. Consciousness alone is.

You are consciousness. You, alone, are.