Everyone’s favourite lawyer-em-up series Phoenix Wright is heading to Wiiware courtesy of Capcom. If you haven’t played these games, they are a mix of point and click puzzle solving and dialogue navigation, with a smattering of great humour thrown in for good measure. One case involves rookie lawyer Phoenix cross-examining a parrot for example. *ahem*

Three individual titles are set to hit Wiiware in Spring 2010, starting with the superb Ace Attorney, which sees Wright defending his bumbling oaf of a best mate Larry Butz while becoming entangled in a much deeper murder case.  Justice for All sees Wright squaring off against whip-wielding lawyer Franziska von Karma, daughter of  big baddie Manfred von Karma. Finally Trials and Tribulations pits you against the ruthless Godot, the meanest mofo this side of the jury stand.

While UK and Europe gamers first got to grips with the series in Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney on DS, the series actually started in Japan as a series on the Gameboy Advance. These Wiiware titles are essentially ports of the GBA originals blown up to fit your TV with all the pixelation and grainyness intact. It’s a tad lazy, but the games are such good fun that it doesn’t really matter.

See what I mean?

and again:

Ok, so I’m a strong believer that games don’t have to look good to be amazing and I wish more people could understand this, but with a much slicker DS version already available, surely Capcom could have seen fit to release this on Wiiware instead?

Still, if you can overlook the visuals, this will be a must-have collection for fans of point and click games everywhere when it launches on Wiiware next year.

From/De: Capcom

CAPCOM^® UNVEILS CLASSIC ACE ATTORNEY^®SERIES FOR WiiWare^TM

The beloved Ace Attorney series featuring the most exciting courtroom dramas of the digital decade are headed to Nintendo’s popular download service in 2010

SAN MATEO, Calif. — November 18, 2009 — Capcom® Entertainment, a leading worldwide developer and publisher of video games, today announced that three classic Ace Attorney® games are scheduled for digital release on Nintendo’s WiiWare next year beginning with the one that started it all, Phoenix Wright™: Ace Attorney® followed by Phoenix Wright™ Ace Attorney®: JUSTICE FOR ALL, and Phoenix Wright™ Ace Attorney®: TRIALS AND TRIBULATIONS. Gamers can expect the deliberations to begin January 2010. These games will cost 1,000 Wii Points, $10.00 USD.

Ace Attorney’s massive popularity and appeal in Japan has caught on in the West and the franchise has now sold well over 3.7 million units worldwide. For the first time ever, this beloved handheld series is making an appearance on a home console, giving gamers access to three of the classic Ace Attorney adventures from the comfort of their own living rooms. Fans and newcomers alike will have a chance to star as the most popular defense attorney in videogames, Phoenix Wright – a man driven by principles and his ability to separate fact from dubious fiction. Each game in the series presents twisting storylines and intriguing gameplay with comical anime stylings. Players will collect evidence, weed through inconsistent testimonies and overcome corrupt agendas to ensure that justice prevails! Present evidence with the wave of the Wii remote or press suspicious testimonies by wiggling it. These games can be played via single-player and has multiple save slots.

Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney (Episode 1 through 4) is the first release hitting in January. The story kicks off with Phoenix Wright defending his childhood friend Larry Butz from a murder charge. But this is only the beginning drama for the tenacious legal eagle as Wright faces unexpected tragedies that will test the limits of his incredible deductive prowess. In May, owners of Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney will be able to download the bonus episode that appeared in the original Nintendo DS™ version of the game. It will cost 100 Wii Points.

In March, Phoenix Wright Ace Attorney: JUSTICE FOR ALL arrives. Phoenix Wright has six months experience and five court victories under his belt. But none of that will do him any good against the ruthless new D.A. in town. Franziska von Karma wants revenge and she’s ready to take Phoenix down at any cost!

In May, Phoenix Wright Ace Attorney: TRIALS AND TRIBULATIONS arrives. Phoenix will face the toughest prosecutor yet as the mysterious hard-boiled “Godot” is gunning for him with extreme prejudice. Get ready for the most intense courtroom standoffs of Phoenix Wright’s career!

For more information, please visit http://press.capcom.com and http://capcom-unity.com.

Campaigners against the expansion of Gatwick airport are objecting to plans to extend its North Terminal and build a multi-storey car park…. From BBC News. Full story

This site may contain information about: travel packages. The blog is also related to: international flights.

I tried to hold myself back, I really did. Unfortunately I just can’t, in good conscience, not object to Barack Obama being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. I find him receiving the award deplorable. According to Alfred Nobel, the prize should be awarded to a person who “during the preceding year… shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses“. Please, for all that is good in the world, tell me where Barack Obama did any of those things?

To be forthright, I do not support Barack Obama — the man. However, my personal feelings toward him have nothing to do with my objection to his being awarded the prize. The Barack Obama I see is a man who can move people with his speech alone as well as a man of good intentions, but a man with absolutely no leadership abilities or accomplishments under his belt. How does that lend itself towards a nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize let alone selection for it? To go a step further, where are the actions and the results to warrant and support such an award?

Barack Obama has not done a single thing to advance peace in the world. If I am wrong, prove it to me. The only thing he has done, in my purview,  was win an election by inspiring others to vote for him with words and phrases like “Hope”, “Change”, and “Yes We Can”. In what reality does that translate to advancing peace in the world? He vowed to make a difference to be sure, but it was merely a campaign promise. To date, he still hasn’t done one thing to advance peace in the world. The U.S. is still engaged in two wars, no new treaties have been signed, no alliances have been formed, and no accords struck.

In my opinion, he was awarded the prize for saying all the right things and for the “future potentiality” of him advancing peace in the world. That is what I find deplorable — the potentiality. How is it that one can merely speak their way to a Nobel Peace Prize? Whatever happened to having to earn it, to having to actually do something to advance the cause of peace? Honestly, if Barack Obama were to advance peace in the world during his Presidency or perhaps after it, I would support such an award; however, I don’t think we should be giving out peace prizes to people who simply talk a good game. There are tons of people in this world who can do that. They can talk the talk, but they can’t walk the walk. I believe Barack Obama falls into that category. I believe he talks the talk, but at the end of the day, he won’t walk the walk. He has shown it in every one of his actions to date. He folds under pressure, he refuses to take a stand, and he doesn’t do anything to “lead” people other than to point the direction from the rear (and from the safety of those in front of him).

To my great sadness, I believe the Nobel Peace Prize lost its luster, its prestige, and its distinction as a result of his selection. No longer will it be seen as valuable since anyone with good speaking skills can simply talk peace and be awarded it. If Barack Obama had any class, he would have said “Thanks, but no thanks”. However, like George W. Bush before him, he is on a power trip and thinks he can cure the ills of the world simply by being President. I’m sorry, but it doesn’t work that way. My hope, though, is that the good people in this world will continue to advance the cause of peace and prosperity despite the Nobel Peace Prize having no teeth. I’m sure truly good people will. I only know that, as one of them, I don’t need a peace prize in order to do something good. In fact, I’d rather not be recognized for it or given any attention. If I do something good, I’d rather someone just say thank you and pay it forward. But that’s just me.

I object to getting stuck in my pants when I try to take them off while wearing my autumnal boots. This happens. I like to change pants over the course of a day, but I want to keep my footwear since the boots are comfortable, and I’m also in a hurry. My choice to not remove the boots prior to removing the pants demonstrates that I value my time and the clean efficiency with which I can achieve my goals. I seek to eliminate redundancy. If I am going to put on my boots again, they ought not to be removed at all. It is therefore a cruel irony that circumventing the re-shoe inevitably leads to a difficult and frustrating situation. My feet become stuck inside of my pants and my mobility becomes impaired. Please do something.

Now, What happens when you’re a PUA and your talking to a particularly attractive girl you’ve just met, you have her engaged, she seems interested, and you say “Come Over here for a second”. to move her maybe 5 ft., and has an objection and says no.
There are several reasons why she wouldn’t want to walk somewhere with someone she has just met. Obviously she just met you, has no idea whether or not your someone who will give her the most fun, enjoyable time of her life, or some creep. She doesn’t know what your intentions are with her. That is why qualifying and stating your interest is so important in the dating world. AFCs don’t do this.

To me, qualifying is asking women open ended questions to give yourself a reason to like them besides their looks.( i.e. What’s your favorite food?) If she ignores your question, she isn’t interested in you enough to even answer and doesn’t believe your valuable enough to talk too about that yet, but if she answers you can flirt with her by saying that is your favorite food in the whole wide world with a big smile on your face, then turn your back on her and it doesn’t even matter what the food is. Men with options do this. Men who don’t have options lean in, talk really fast, and act as if everything attractive girls do should be worshipped. Then of course if she doesn’t desperately try to get your attention you can turn back around talk, talk, talk, and qualify her a few more times then move her.
The key usually is to ask the qualifying question then wait assuming she’ll answer. Most of the time having a reason is good but sometimes it isn’t. You have to know when to be serious and when to be playful. When you qualify you should be serious. If your an AFC your probably don’t do this.
If you approach a girl in the club, you can move her within a few seconds to a couple minutes, but if you’re in a city park it might take you a few more minutes. In any relationship, the girl will probably say no and not comply to your command more then once. Being persistent with women is key. but don’t be needy with women.
So lets go through the scenario where you say “Come Over here for a second”. And she doesn’t comply and says “No” or you start to walk and she does nothing. If this would happen to me I would wait about 4 seconds then say “No Biggie” if she says no. then keep talking, talking, change the subject and talk some more. MAYBE qualify her a few times. Then say “Come Over here for a second”. By doing this you’ve given her a chance to become more comfortable in the relationship that you are creating with her and giving her less reasons to have any kind of objection to your advances. She even might start to believe your not some creep and like you for her personality.

As one of my readers has kindly noted, I haven’t updated in 11 days. Don’t worry though, I’m very much aware of this, and blogging hasn’t been forgotten. I do believe, however, that the next post will be very, very, very long. (Lots of photos to put up! ^^ I’m excited )

A welcome to Cloud, who has gotten a blog at wordpress: [OBJECTIONABLE] Content. May your blogging days be long and fruitful, unlike mine (okay okay, I’ll stop xD)

I can’t actually believe it’s almost the end of school. Along with that, it also feels like the end of life as we’ve known it, for the past how many years. Going to school structured our days, weeks, months and years. As a result, it frightens me a little that we’ll be leaving in about a week’s time. We won’t be able to see our friends every day, and we might even lose touch completely with some. It’s a depressing thought. And the amazing fact is, the more I don’t want school to end, the faster the end approaches. I just can’t believe this at the moment.

Which leads me to what I had originally intended to write. I suppose that this has been repeated SO many times, but sooner or later, we have to come to terms with the fact that all (good) things come to an end. It’s an unavoidable truth of the world. Without the bad things in life, there would be nothing to compare the good things to. The old must make room for the young, the night follows the day, some people die and others are born; and yet, incessantly, unyieldingly even, life goes on. We can only make the most of NOW. I think it’s important for us to realise this.

“Yesterday is history, tomorrow is mystery, but today is the present. Treat it as just that – a present, a gift.”

I leave you with one photo of the duststorm this morning…I’ll upload the rest when my Flickr uploads reset, so please check back for them!

The view from the station this morning, as I rush to catch the 7:00 in time for morning physics class

Mega long post about what’s been happening, coming up soon.

Update: due to incessant squawking by a certain someone (you know who you are…), I am forced to give them a late welcome into the blogging world. So yes, I hope thy days are awful. Now, go visit “where is my mind?”. xD

This scene comes from the movie, “Boiler Room.”

Since I kind of insulted Nancy, I did want to explain myself for those of you who may be reading this blog but who may question my comment’s meaning. Nancy Grace hosts HLN’s legal analysis program, “Nancy Grace”, on Headline Prime. She is based in CNN’s New York bureau. I said that Nancy’s show is appreciated by all the morons in America. First, I want to correct myself. Some morons have not discovered Nancy or her show yet. As soon as they do and provided they are somewhat computer literate they will, no doubt” emerge as one of her fans. Why? Because Nancy is the Jerry Springer of the tabloid news world. That’s right, Nancy is highly educated. She is an ex-prosecutor. Nancy grew up in a shack in the back woods apparently and made something more for herself than her back round would normally yield. Unfortunately, Nancy sold out for fame and money and did so at the expense of her own beliefs. I believe Nancy believes in this country and our laws. I also think it’s very unfortunate that she tries every case in the media for the purpose of the almighty rating. It seems to the educated viewer that Nancy Grace finds that everyone is guilty until proven innocent. Yesterday, I was watching Anderson Cooper, a distinguished and highly respected journalist and reporter interviewing Nancy Grace. He was obviously indignant, based on his questions and commentary, about the plight of having to be associated with Ms. Grace who works for the the same News agency he does. It was quite funny when after Nancy referred to Casey Anthony as the “tot mom”, a catch phrase she uses too often (Nancy is an expert at making people look even worse than they already do by coining derogatory catch phrases),
Anderson asked “why do you call her “tot mom”? After her response that ’she is a mom who has a “tot”‘, Anderson asked, “why can’t you use her name-”Casey”. Anderson went on to ask Nancy why she tried people before the actual trial and “what happened to “innocent before proven guilty?”" Nancy stated that she predicted O.J. would be convicted and he was aquitted. Thus it is justified to promote a conviction on television prior to a trial since, based on the O.J. verdict, it has no effect anyway. Are we to assume that based on one example of a man who spent many millions on his defense, that it isn’t possible for someone of Nancy’s stature in T.V. America to effect a verdict? This is the problem with Nancy Grace. She thinks people are stupid, including apparently, Anderson Cooper who could think circles around Nancy Grace while drunk and in his sleep.

Nancy Grace is the best example of the whoring of news in America for profit. Her insincere “what’s your question DEAR?” and her fake and instantaneous “almost crying” is both insulting and laughable. Nancy habitually goes from happy and smiling to breaking down into emotional “heartache” from moment to moment bringing forth moronic pity and indignation from her uneducated, beer guzzling, white bread eating, processed meat devouring, creton viewers. Her viewers who regularly state on the air, “Nancy I just love you and the twins” feel an inexplicable kinship with a woman who convincingly promotes hate and unjust
accusation at every (let me use one of Nancy’s favorite words), “juncture”.

I will say that at times, Nancy can be unintentionally hilarious. Her frequent guest a dinasaur by the name of Jenkasaurus

Well I guess I have “weighed in” huh Nancey? God Bless the idiots of the world without whom you would have a different and probably dignified career. See Anderson expose Nancy Grace here

ShrIgurubhyo namaH

The Flawless Advaitic teaching of ‘Tat tvam asi’

(A Study in Reply to a Dvaita Objection)

In the Chandogya Upanishad VI Chapter occurs the dialogue between UddAlaka, the father and Shvetaketu, the son.  This dialogue, called SadvidyA , is a teaching of Brahman, Sat, as the Satyam.  The teaching, through the famous ‘Tat tvam asi’ occurring nine times, culminates in Shvetaketu gaining the Konwledge of the Truth.  In the following remarks, sourced from the site : http://www.madhva.org/vms_mi/htm/Dashaprakarana.htm

the propriety of the Advaitic interpretation of ‘Tat tvam asi’ has been questioned/objected to, upholding the interpretation of the Dvaita school.

In this article the above objection is analyzed in detail and the appropriateness and  the flawlessness of the Advaitic interpretation is established.  Here is the objection:

(http://www.madhva.org/vms_mi/htm/Dashaprakarana.htm)

(Upanishad  & DashaprakaraNa)

// INTERPRETATION OF ATAT TVAMASI
…. The context of the teaching of Atat tvam asi is that svetaketu had developed the pride that he knew everything. He was to be told that he did not know the highest entity, i.e. Supreme God as distinct and superior to him. He also did not know that he was under the control of this Supreme God. In this context, no useful purpose would be served if he is told that he is identical with the God. This would increase his pride. Therefore, he is told Atat tvam asi, you are not the God. You are completely under his control. Therefore, it is jivesvarabheda that is intended to be conveyed here. Ekavijnanena sarvijnana stated in this context does not indicate upadanopadeyabhava here but it is based on pradhanya and sadrsya, therefore, this does not convey jaganmithyatva. //

The Advaitin’s Response to the above observation:

At the very outset it is to be noted that the above observation is fraught with many misconceptions.  These are classified under the following heads:

1. Misconception about the Upanishadic protocol in giving out the Tattva Upadesha.
2. Misconception about the facts of the Chandogya Upanishad VI Chapter regarding the above.
3. Misconception about the Chandogya Upanishad VI Chapter contents of the teaching of the Tattva.
4. Misconception about the Advaitic method of interpreting the Mahavakya ‘Tat tvam asi.’

The above points are considered hereunder:

1. Misconception about the Upanishadic protocol in giving out the Tattva Upadesha:

In the Vedantic scripture, we note one outstanding feature: The disciple approaches the Acharya with reverence and devotion and offering prostrations, uses pleasing words of request and respect while seeking the teaching to be bestowed to him.  For example, in the Mundaka Upanishad (1.i.3) it is said:

शौनको ह वै महाशालोऽङ्गिरसं विधिवदुपसन्नः पप्रच्छ । कस्मिन्नु भगवो विज्ञाते सर्वमिदं विज्ञातं भवतीति ।

[Shaunaka, well known as a great householder, having approached Angiras duly, asked, ‘O adorable Sir, (which is that thing) which having been known, all this becomes known?’]

About the type of aspirant too there is a norm set by the Upanishads:

For example, in the Mundaka Upanishad (1.ii.13) it is said:

तस्मै स विद्वान् उपसन्नाय सम्यक् प्रशान्तचित्ताय शमान्विताय ।

येनाक्षरं पुरुषं वेद सत्यं प्रोवाच तां तत्त्वतो ब्रह्मविद्याम् ॥

[To him who has approached duly, whose heart is calm and whose outer organs are under control, that man of enlightenment should adequately impart that knowledge of Brahman by which one realizes the true and imperishable Purusha.]

In the Taittiriya Upanishad, Bhruguvalli, we find BhRgu, the aspirant, approaching his father VaruNa, seeking the Tattva UIpadesha:

अधीहि भगवो ब्रह्मेति ।

[‘O, revered Sir, teach me Brahman’] This manner of addressing the teacher (father) and seeking Brahmavidya occurs several times in this section itself.

In the Bhagavadgita (4.34), the Lord says:

तद्विद्धि प्रणिपातेन परिप्रश्नेन सेवया ।

उपदेक्ष्यन्ति ते ज्ञानं ज्ञानिनस्तत्त्वदर्शिनः ॥

[Know this (Truth) by long prostration, by enquiry, by service.  Those men of wisdom who have realized the Truth will teach you this wisdom.]

The precaution too is specified by the Lord (18.67):

इदं ते नातपस्काय नाभक्ताय कदाचन ।

न चाशुश्रूषवे वाच्यं न च मां योऽभ्यसूयति ॥

[This (which has been taught to thee) is never to be taught to one who is devoid of austerities, nor to one who is not devoted, nor to one who does not do service, nor to one who speaks ill of Me.]

The set of qualifications that a spiritual seeker aught to be endowed with, is also specified by the Lord.  Here is an example (13.7):

अमानित्वं अदम्भित्वं अहिंसा क्षान्तिरार्जवम् ।

अचार्योपासनं शौचं स्थैर्यमात्मविनिग्रहः ॥

[Humility, modesty, innocence, patience, uprightness, service of the teacher, purity, steadfastness, self-control..]

In these examples, taken just as a sample, we find that the aspirant seeking the Highest Knowledge has to be a qualified one, possessed of humility, devotion to the Acharya, etc.  Also he must approach the Acharya in the prescribed manner, with prostrations, etc.  The protocol in this matter is taught by the Upanishads and the Gita.  Unless an aspirant, duly qualified, approaches in the said manner, the Acharya would not give out the teaching.

दैवीसंपद् विमोक्षाय निबन्धाय आसुरी मता । Says Bhagavan in the Gita (16.5).  The Sattivic, Daivi, qualities are conducive for the arising of the Jnanam that leads to Moksha.

The Lord has also stated दम्भो दर्पोऽभिमानश्च…आसुरीम् (16.5) [Ostentation, arrogance and self-conceit ….demoniac lot.]

‘mAnitvam’, ‘Atma-sambhAvitatvam’, pride, egotism, etc. are listed as AsurI, demoniac, qualities not conducive for the Moksha sadhana.

2. Misconception about the facts of the Chandogya Upanishad VI Chapter regarding the above.

In the Chandogya Upanishad VI chapter too, as stated in the foregoing, the Upanishadic method is followed.  Shvetaketu approaches Uddalaka and addresses him:

कथं नु भगव: स आदेशो भवति (६.१.३)

[‘O Venerable Sir, in what way is that instruction imparted?’]  (6.1.3)

न वै नूनं भगवन्तस्त एतदवेदिषुः….भगवान्स्त्वेव मे तद्ब्रवीतु .. (६.१.७)

[‘May yourself, venerable Sir, tell me that’.] (6.1.7)

भूय एव मा भगवान् विज्ञापयतु..(६.५.४)

[‘May the venerable Sir explain to me over again.’] (6.5.4)

This last mode of request is made by Shvetaketu innumerable times throughout the entire discourse.

Uddalaka too, bestowing affection, addresses the boy ‘Somya’ throughout the discourse several times.

This mode of surrender, praNipatanam, and devotional addressing as ‘BhagavaH’ by Shvetaketu shows that he no longer was possessed of the pride of learning; he had transformed into a sincere, qualified seeker of Truth.  This transformation came about when his ego took a severe beating upon being questioned by Uddalaka, the father, about the crucial knowledge that when comprehended results in liberation from samsaric existence.  It can reasonably be assumed that some time lapsed between the father questioning him about this esoteric knowledge and the real transformation in Shvetaketu taking place.  It could have been days or weeks or even months. (The first mantra VI.i.1 opens with Uddalaka exhorting Shvetaketu to get initiated and go to a Gurukulam.  The very second mantra informs us that Shvetaketu has returned after staying for twelve years in the Gurukulam.)  That such a transformation must have taken place could be inferred from what we saw in the earlier section about the Upanishadic/Gita protocol regarding the requirement of qualification (vinaya, etc.) and manner of approach that is shown as a sine qua non for seeking and bestowing of Tattva Upadesha.

If this is not granted, there will be the grave misdemeanor of implicating the Shruti of flouting the well-laid out norms regarding the Tattva Upadesha.  Thus, Shvetaketu, even though did entertain pride when he returned from Gurukula, yet, over a period of time shed that pride and developed genuine jijnAsA for the tattva.  Uddalaka’s initial questioning did the magic.

That Tattva upadesha will not become fruitful in an unqualified aspirant is well known.  Our inference regarding Shvetaketu’s transformation is proved by yet another fact from this Upanishad itself.  In the end of the discourse, the Upanishad reports that Shvetaketu succeeded in realizing the Truth of his Sat-identity.  Says the Upanishad:  तद्धास्य विजज्ञौ, तद्धास्य विजज्ञौ इति (6.16.3) [He, Shvetaketu understood that from him, Uddalaka.]

3. Misconception about the Chandogya Upanishad VI Chapter contents of the teaching of the Tattva.

The Upanishadic teaching commences with the boy asking to know what is the nature of that Important Teaching.  Uddalaka gives out three examples to show how  the knowledge of the material cause of effects results in gaining the knowledge of all the effects of that class. The ultimate, pAramArthik, unreality of the effects and the ultimate reality of the cause is brought out through the three examples. This is applied in the Tattva teaching by declaring that all this was Sat alone before manifesting as the world. The Cause Sat and the universe, the three elements, tejas, ap and annam (fire, water and earth) as effects are presented.  The elements are shown to be the cause of the individual body-mind apparatus.  On the analogy of the ‘VAchArambhana Shruti’ (…..mRttiketyeva satyam), at every stage Uddalaka teaches:

• the non-difference of the effect, the elements, from their cause, the Sat,
• the non-difference of the body-mind apparatus from their cause, the elements, and ultimately
• the non-difference of the body-mind apparatus from their ultimate cause, the Sat.

The ‘VAchArambhana Shruti’ is repeatedly demonstrated by both utterance and application.  It is based on this logic that the teaching ‘Tat tvam asi’ occurs nine times in the Upanishad.

4. Misconception about the Advaitic method of interpreting the Mahavakya ‘Tat tvam asi.’

Surely, Shvetaketu, as a jiva, cannot be identified, equated, with Sat, the Supreme.  The jiva is alpashakta, alpajnaH, with finite power and limited knowledge.  Sat, on the other hand is infinite.  The two cannot be the same as they now appear to be.  But the Upanishad teaches that Shvetaketu is Sat in truth.  That means, since the body-mind apparatus is in reality Sat, Shvetaketu, free of the body-mind apparatus, is Sat, Existence.  Since the elements –  that make up the body-mind apparatus of all living beings and the whole of the inert material world – is really Sat, their Cause, Sat Itself is not a cause really.  The elements are only vikara-s, appearances, of Sat and therefore only mere names; essentially they are Sat alone, just as the clay-products are substantial only as their material cause, clay,  but unreal as mere names. The unreality of the effects is understood only from the analytical point of view; the practical utility of effects like using a clay pot for cooking, storing water, etc., is not denied.   Thus, in the Tat tvam asi equation, the essentially-Sat Shvetaketu is non-different from the essential-Sat.

Since pride, etc. are only an attribute of the mind, a vikAra, Shvetaketu is clearly different from the mind, etc. and is not endowed with any attributes, both of the body and the mind.  It is on this basis that the Tat tvam asi teaching is given out.

A few similarities:

1. There is a similarity between the opening question, forming the core teaching, in the Mundaka and the Chandogya (VI) Upanishads:

For example, in the Mundaka Upanishad (1.i.3) it is said:

शौनको ह वै महाशालोऽङ्गिरसं विधिवदुपसन्नः पप्रच्छ । कस्मिन्नु भगवो विज्ञाते सर्वमिदं विज्ञातं भवतीति ।

[Shaunaka, well known as a great householder, having approached Angiras duly, asked, ‘O adorable Sir, (which is that thing) which having been known, all this becomes known?’]

Here, Shounaka, the aspirant, reverentially approaching the Acharya, Angiras, seeks to know of ‘That by knowing which everything becomes known.’  This same question is asked by Uddalaka, the teacher, addressing Shvetaketu, the aspirant:

येनाश्रुतं श्रुतं भवत्यमतं मतम्, अविज्ञातं विज्ञातं इति । (६.१.३)

[Are you aware of ‘That by which the unheard of becomes heard, the unthought of becomes thought of, the unknown become known?’]  (6.1.3)

The entire focus of the teaching, along with several examples, is to make known That crucial Truth, Brahman, called Sat in this Upanishad.

2. In the Mundakopanishad, the mantra 2.1.10 reads:

// पुरुष एवेदं विश्वं कर्म तपो ब्रह्म परामृतम् । एतद्यो वेद निहितं गुहायां सोऽविद्याग्रन्थिं विकिरितीह सोम्य ॥

The Bhashya:

//  एवं पुरुषात् सर्वमिदं सम्प्रसूतम् । अतो वाचारम्भणं विकारो नामधेयमनृतं, पुरुष इत्येव सत्यम् । अतो पुरुष एवेदं विश्वं सर्वम् । न विश्वं नाम पुरुषादन्यत्किञ्चिदस्ति । अतो यदुक्तं तदेवेदं अभिहितं ’कस्मिन्नु भगवो विज्ञाते सर्वमिदं विज्ञातं भवतीति’ । एवं अस्मिन्हि परस्मिन्नात्मनि सर्वकारणे पुरुषे विज्ञाते पुरुष एवेद्ं विश्वं नान्यदस्तीति विज्ञातं भवतीति । //

[Translation of the above]

‘Thus from the PuruSha emerged all this.  Therefore, ‘All modification is supported by speech and it is name only’ (Chandogya Up. VI.i.4 – 6), and it is false; but only that which is the PuruSha is true. …

The Mundaka mantra:

‘The PuruSha alone is all this – (comprising) karma and knowledge.  He who knows this supreme, immortal Brahman, existing in the heart, destroys here the knot of ignorance, O good-looking one!)’

The Bhashya:

There is not such thing as the Universe apart from the PuruSha.  Therefore the very thing that was asked in the question, ‘O adorable Sir, (which is that thing) which having been known, all this becomes known?’ (I.i.3), has been declared here thus: On knowing this PuruSha alone, the Supreme Self, the source of everything, there arises the realization, ‘PuruSha alone is all this – there is nothing besides.’ //

In the Chandogya Upanishad too, the above theme, of the Mundaka Upanishad, alone is what is discussed.

3. In the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad there is the AjAtashatru BrAhmaNam (II.i).  AjAtashatru, a Kshatriya, a Jnani, is a King.  He is approached by a Brahmana named BAlAki, a conceited one, priding himself with an assumed Brahman-Knowledge.  He visits the King and offers to teach him Atma vidya and only ends up as the King AjAtashatru’s disciple.  This transformation came about as a result of the King questioning BaalAki.  Unable to answer the King’s questions, BAlAki realized his shortcomings and submitted himself to the King and sought to know the Tattva.  It is only when he thus submitted and became a fit recipient of Knowledge, did Ajaatashatru proceed to teach him.  Thus, pride is decidedly not the begetter of teaching of the tattva.

Similar is the case in the Uddalaka-Shvetaketu dialogue.  The conceited Shvetaketu could not comprehend Uddalaka’s initial question regarding the Paratattva. He was floored by the very depth of the question.  He realized his limitation and surrendered to Uddalaka.  The teaching was given to him only when the pride had given place to meekness and true desire to learn the Tattva.

The Upanishadic/Advaitic teaching of ‘Tat tvam asi’ cannot ‘increase the pride’ of Shvetaketu for the following reasons:

• First, we have seen earlier that even at the start of the teaching Shvetaketu had shed his pride and had surrendered to his Father/Acharya, Uddalaka, and beseeched him to teach that Vidya.
• The identity between Sat and Shvetaketu is only after Shvetaketu, by  discrimination,  viveka, just as in the pancha-kosha viveka of the Taittiriya Upanishad,  separates the body-mind-senses apparatus from his being and knows himself as the pure Existence. This is called the ‘shodhita-tvam-padArtha’.  In this condition, no pride can ever creep in.  There could have been a possibility of pride sneaking in if the teaching of Tat tvam asi had meant equating the JagatkAraNa Sat with Shvetaketu, the jiva.  This we have already seen is an impossibility as Sat, the Cause of the Universe can never be equated with Shvetaketu, the finite bound jiva.  If this Upanishadic/Advaitic method of establishing identity is clearly understood, there would be no room for the objection that ‘the Advaitic teaching of Tat tvam asi will increase Shvetaketu’s pride.’

Some possible arguments: If it is argued by the Dvaitin that ‘Even at the start of the teaching Shvetaketu was conceited and only as the teaching progressed he shed his pride’, then this argument applies to the Advaitin too.  If the Dvaitin further argues: ‘Shvetaketu was proud at the start of the teaching, but by repeatedly being pointed out that ‘he is not Sat’ but only ‘dependent on Sat,’ by holding out various examples he became humble, then the Advaitin would argue: Granting that Shvetaketu had pride at the commencement of the teaching, by being exposed to the unreality of the effects from the cause Sat, with the support  of various examples, he was able to appreciate that he was after all not the body-mind apparatus but the pure Existence, Sat, and shed his pride which had no meaning/purpose whatsoever in the light of the Upanishadic teaching that he, in truth, is the Infinite Sat. Pride could exist only in the wake of the possibility to compare oneself with other/s.  The Sat divested of the jivatva upAdhi and the JagatkAraNatva upAdhi will be the adviteeya entity and hence there will be no ‘other/s‘ to make any comparison against.  Hence there will be no room for pride, etc. in such a realized person. ‘Brahmavid Apnoti param’ says the Taittiriya Upanishad.

A synopsys:

• The objection from the Dvaita school arises only because of not appreciating the general norms of the Upanishad/Gita in giving out the teaching of Brahmavidya.
• Even if Tat tvam asi is interpreted in the Dvaita way, to admit that Shvetaketu was proud even at the commencement of the teaching would implicate the Upanishad of flouting its own norms of bestowing Tattva Upadesha  to an adhikAri, a fit candidate,  alone and not to an anadhikAri, an unfit candidate.
• Also, even the teaching of adheenatva/paratantra (dependence) of the jiva will not sink in a mind that is filled with pride.  A great degree of humility, anahankAra, is required for appreciating and accepting the teaching that ‘I am dependent on the Lord’.
• It would be best to recognize, from the wordings of the Upanishad, that Shvetaketu had shed his pride prior to seeking the teaching and therefore was a fit adhikAri for Brahmavidya.
• The question of the Advaitic ‘Tat tvam asi’ increasing Shvetaketu’s pride does not arise at all.
• The unreality of the effect, the material universe,  and the Sole reality of the Cause, Sat, has been brought out by the teaching culminating in Shvetaketu appreciating that his real nature is non different from the Sat, the universal Cause.  This knowledge would not have consummated in the presence of pride, etc. (Related reading: ‘Tat tvam asi Nine Times’).

श्रीसद्गुरुचरणारविन्दार्पणमस्तु

ShrIsadgurucharaNaravindArpaNamastu

Om Tat Sat