By the word `knowledge' the s'ruti makes it clear that Brahman is not insentient like clay. By the three words - truth, knowledge and infinite - it is made clear that Brahman is different from everything in the universe which is always subject to change, is insentient and limited by time, space and other objects. Here knowledge means `consciousness'
and not a particular knowledge, which has a beginning and an end and is therefore finite. This consciousness is not distinct from Brahman, but is its essential nature, like the light
of the sun or the heat of fire. This consciousness is eternal and is present even during
deep sleep. A specific act of knowing takes place only when the mind functions in association with the relevant sense-organ, but this must be distinguished from consciousness, which is ever present. It is this consciousness which is known as Brahman.

    Brahman, which is Pure Consciousness, becomes a `knower' only when the intellect is superimposed on it. Upades'a saahas'rii-(Metrical portion)-Ch.18. Verse 65-The Self is looked upon as a knower only because of the superimposition on it of the knowership of
the intellect. Similarly, the intellect is considered as a knower only because of the superimposition of consciousness on it. Since the words truth, knowledge, and infinite
are only intended to convey that Brahman is different from all that is subject to change,
all that is insentient and all that is limited, and since such an object is not known to
anyone, it may be argued that Brahman is non-existent, like the objects mentioned in
the following statement:- "Having bathed in the waters of the mirage and adorned his
head with sky-flowers (i.e. flowers which grow in the sky), here goes the son of a barren woman, carrying a bow made out of the horn of a hare". The answer to this is that, since the words are intended as a definition of Brahman and a definition is given only for
something that exists and not for something non-existent, the argument is not
tenable.

    Here Aanandagiri says-The word truth connotes unfailing existence, the word consciousness connotes self-luminous knowledge of all objects and the word
infinite connotes all-pervasiveness. Thus each of these words conveys a positive
idea, while excluding the opposite and does not mean a mere negation. The words
satyam, jnaanam, etc, apply to Brahman only in their secondary sense (lakshyaartha)
and not in their primary sense (vaachyaartha)-see Samkshepas'aariirakam Ch.1.
verses 178 to 184. Brahman is in reality attributeless In Brahma suutra 3.2.11 to 3.2.21,
it is established that, though the scriptures describe Brahman as both qualified (Ch.up.3.14.2) and as unqualified (Br.up.3.8.8), Brahman is really attributeless.

    The description of Brahman as qualified is only for the purpose of Upaasanaa (meditation). Brahma suutra 3.2.22. S.B.-In Br.up.2.3.1 it is said that Brahman has two forms-gross and subtle, mortal and immortal, limited and unlimited and defined and undefined. Then it is said in Br.up.2.3.6 - "Now therefore the description
(of Brahman)-neti, neti-not so, not so". These two negatives deny the two aspects,
gross and subtle etc. By this the reality of all creation is denied. Two kinds of definition
of Brahman

    There are two kinds of definition of Brahman-(1) svaruupalakshaNam-definition with reference to the essential nature, e.g. satyam jnaanam anantam brahma-taitt,up. 2.1. (2) taTasthalakshaNam-This is based on an accidental feature, which helps to distinguish
the object defined. An example is the identification of a house by pointing out a crow
sitting on it. While the crow may fly away, it nevertheless helps a person to know which
is the house meant. In the case of Brahman, such a definition is-yato vaa imaani
bhuutaani jaayante------That from which all these beings are born, that by which they
live and that towards which they move and into which they merge. (taitt.up,3.1.1).

    How the Self pervades all bodies : examples : Br.up.1.4.7 S.B.-yathaa cha kshuraH kshuradhaane---- As a razor lies in one part of its case, as fire lies in wood, pervading it,
so does the Self dwell in the body, pervading it in a general and particular way. There it
is perceived as doing the functions of living, seeing, etc. The meaning of "neti, neti'--- Br,up. 2.3.6.S.B.-aades'o nirdes'o BrahmaNaH. KaH punarasau----- ---neti neti iti nirdes'aH. How is it sought to describe Brahman , the Truth of truth? By the elimination
of all differences due to limiting adjuncts, the words "Neti, neti" refer to something that has no distinguishing mark, such as name, form, action, heterogeneity, species or
qualities. Words refer to things through one or more of these marks. But Brahman
has none of these distinguishing marks. Therefore it cannot be described as, "It is
such and such ", as we can describe a cow by saying, "There moves a white cow with horns". Brahman can be described only by the superimposition of name, form and
action. When, however, we wish to describe its true nature, free from all differences
due to limiting adjuncts, the only way is to describe it as -not this, not this. Brahman transcends all qualities Br.up.3.5.1.S.B.-avivekibhiH talamalavadiva gaganam -----

    As the sky, fancied by the ignorant as being concave and blue, is really without
these qualities, being untouched by them, so also Brahman-Aatman, although thought
of by the ignorant as being subject to hunger, thirst, etc, really transcends all these qualities. The S'ruti says-"It is not affected by human misery, being beyond it"-
KaTha up. 2.2.11 Brahman, the individual self and iis'vara Br.up.3.8.12.S.B.-kastarhi bhedaH eteshaam? What is the difference among them? It is only due to the difference
in the limiting adjuncts. Intrinsically, there is neither difference nor identity among
them, for all the three are in essence Pure Consciousness, homogeneous like a lump
of salt. When the unconditioned Self has, as the limiting adjuncts, the body and organs which are characterized by ignorance, desire and action, it is called the transmigrating individual self. When the limiting adjunct is the power of eternal and unlimited
knowledge, which is Maayaa, the same Self is known as iis'vara, who is the antaryaamii
or Inner Controller. The same Self, free from all limiting adjuncts, is Brahman. When
the limiting adjuncts are the bodies of hiraNyagarbha, the gods, men, animals and
others, the same Self assumes those particular names and forms. Br.up.4.4.5.S.B.
-sa vaa ayam ya evam samsarati ------ as'anaayaadyatiitaH. The transmigrating self
is indeed Brahman, which is beyond hunger, etc.

    Br.up.4.4.25.S.B.-ya evam yathoktam aatmaanam--------- He who knows the self described above as the Brahman which is beyond fear becomes Brahman. This is the purport of the whole Upanishad put in a nutshell. It is to bring out this purport that the ideas of creation, maintenance and dissolution of the universe, as well as the ideas of action, its factors and results were superimposed on the Self. Then, by the negation of
the superimposed attributes the true nature of Brahman as free from all attributes has been brought out. This is the method of adhyaaropa and apavaada, superimposition and negation, which is adopted by Vedaanta. Br. Up.5.1.1.S.B.-yadyapi Brahmaatmaadis'abdaaH------- Although the words `Brahman', `aatman' etc, are names
of Brahman, we see from the s'ruti that Om is its most intimate appellation. Therefore,
Om is the best means for the realization of Brahman. Om is both a symbol for Brahman and its name. Brahman is both the material and the efficient cause of the universe. Panchadas'i-1.44-Brahman becomes the material cause of the universe when it is associated with that aspect of maayaa in which there is predominance of tamas. It
becomes the efficient cause when associated with that aspect of maayaa in which there
is predominance of sattva.

    Brahman is free from all the three types of differences Panchadas'i-2.20 and 21.-Differences are of three kinds. The difference of a tree from its leaves, flowers,
fruits, etc, is the difference within an object. This is known as svagata bheda. The difference of one tree from another tree is the difference between objects of the same species. This is known as sajaatiiya bheda. The difference of a tree from a rock is the difference between objects of different species. This is known as vijaatiiya bheda.
None of these differences exists with regard to Brahman, because there is nothing
else of the same species or of a different species and there is no internal difference because Brahman is homogeneous.

    This is what is affirmed in the Chhaandogya upanishad (6.2.1) by the words
"ekam eva advitiiyam"-one, only, without a second. The word "one' negates sajaatiiya bheda, the word `only' negates svagata bheda and the words `without a second' negate vijaatiiya bheda. Brahman is free from all limitations Panchadas'i-3.35, 36, 37-Being all-pervasive, Brahman is not limited by space. Being eternal, it is not limited by time. Since all objects in the universe are merely superimposed on Brahman, Brahman is not limited by any object, just as a rope is not limited by the illusory snake superimposed
on it .