Indologist Paul Deussen’s summary of the essence of metaphysics is perfect: “All that is changeable ultimately leads back to the unchangeable, to discover and learn to know which is the whole problem of metaphysics; wherefore in the domain of metaphysics there can be no becoming” (The System of the Vedanta, p. 434).

First, the changeable manifold is traceable back to the Principle, which is unchangeable and simple. Second, when it’s discovered that the manifold is ultimately unreal, it’s simultaneously discovered that the Principle is the only reality. Yet, third, because the Principle is the sole reality and because it is a homogenous and unchangeable, it follows that the Principle cannot become. Hence, “in the domain of metaphysics there can be no becoming.”

The mahavakya, “Aham Brahmasmi” (I am Brahman), reveals the truth of what was, at an intellectual level, written in paragraph 2. The “I” that I am, when it is divested of all limiting adjuncts, is revealed to be Atman, the divine and only “I.” But this divine “I”–which is eternal and thus unchanging–cannot be anything but the true nature of Reality (or Brahman). Since Atman-Brahman cannot change and since I, ultimately and really only, am Atman-Brahman, it’s clear that I cannot change and thus cannot become or unbecome.

The metaphysical doctrine is, in a word, at one with soteriology. To know what I am is to experience deliverance; it is to know peace, or clarity, or love.