Traditionally in Vedanta teachings there are said to be 2 kinds of liberation, Jivanmukti (liberation in this life) where the body continues, and Videhamukti (liberation without a body), which is liberation after the body dies.
However in truth there is only one liberation.
From the point of the (ignorant) onlooker, it may appear that a sage has a body or doesn’t have a body (if their body has died), but from the point of view of the sage, there is never a body (or a mind or a world).
So various types of liberation are only for the (ignorant) onlooker, and never in Reality for the ‘Sage’.
(I put ‘sage’ in quotes as it is only from the ignorant onlookers view that such a things as a sage, a liberated person, appears to exist’)
There is only ‘One’ (although you cannot even say ‘one’ really, as Liberation or Self is beyond all conception).
This is why in Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, Talk number 265 Ramana says the following (my additions are in square brackets):
Questioner: There are said to be sadeha mukta (liberated in body) and videha mukta (liberated without body).
Sri Ramana Maharshi: There is no liberation, and where are muktas [the liberated ones]?
Questioner: Do not Hindu sastras [scriptures] speak of mukti [liberation]?
Sri Ramana Maharshi: Mukti is synonymous with the Self. Jivan mukti (liberation while alive) and videha mukti (liberation after the body falls) are all for the ignorant. The Jnani [liberated one] is not conscious of mukti or bandha (bondage).
Bondage, liberation and orders of mukti are all said for an ajnani [ignorant or unliberated one] in order that ignorance might be shaken off.
There is only mukti and nothing else.
Ramana Maharshi
What is the nature of Maya? | Sri Ramana Maharshi | Upadesa Manjari (Spiritual Instruction)
Question 5. What is the nature of maya?
Sri Ramana Maharshi: Maya is that which makes us regard as nonexistent the Self, the Reality, which is always and everywhere present, all-pervasive and Self-luminous, and as existent the individual soul (jiva), the world (jagat), and God (para) which have beenconclusively proved to be nonexistent at all times and places.
~Sri Ramana Maharishi, Upadesa Manjari (Spiritual Instruction)
Tom’s comments:
ie. Maya is that which makes you think there is no Self or Ultimate Reality, but makes you think there are individual persons (jivas), there is a world (jagat), and there is a force that governs these…When in fact the opposite is true.
The Self can Never be a Witness
The Self is not a witness at all, and it can never be a witness in Truth, but as long as we think we are a body-mind entity, and as long as we see a world outside of or apart from ourself, the Self is indicated or pointed out as being the Subject or the Witness merely for the purposes of the teaching.
When in Self-Enquiry we turn our attention away from the objects, which means we turn our attention away from the various gross and suble phenomena that are perceived, and towards the Subject or Self (‘Witness’), also known as the I AM or the 1st person, eventually the ego-mind which takes itself to be a body-mind entity dissolves or dies and all that is left is the Subject-Witness-Self.
This Self can no longer truly be said to be either a Subject (for there are no objects present), nor can it be said to be a Witness, as there is nothing to witness. It is All, it is the Sole Reality, ‘One without a second’, as it is often described as being in the Upanishads.
Hence Bhagavan Ramana is recorded as saying:
If you refrain from looking at this
Or that or any other object
Then by that overpowering look
Into absolute Being you become
Yourself the boundless space of pure
Awareness which alone is Real Being.
~ Sri Ramana Maharshi, Guru Vachaka Kovai, Verse 647
The ego/mind, when attending to objects, considers itself to be an object (the body-mind). However, when the ego attends or pays attention to itself (also known as the I-sense, or first person, or I am), and in so doing no longer pays attention to the objects it was previously attending or paying attention to, it discovers its true nature without objects, ie it’s true formless nature, then it has actually discovered its actual or real nature which is Self.
This is why Sri Ramana states In Day by Day with Bhagavan:
‘The mind turned inwards is the Self; turned outwards, it becomes the ego and all the world’
Moving from Concepts/Conceptual Teachings to Silence and Liberation
The Supreme is found in Everything Everywhere | Sri Bhagavan Ramana Maharshi
There is no Duality in Non-duality | Self-knowledge
[Sri Ramana Maharshi writes in] Upadesa Undiyar verse 26, “Being Self is itself knowing Self, because Self is that which is devoid of duality…“.
Therefore it follows that the very nature of Self is itself knowledge, though it is a knowledge which is devoid of the act of knowing.
That is why Sri Bhagavan says in verse 12 of Ulladu Narpadu, “ … That which knows cannot be [true] knowledge … “.
The same truth is also expressed by Sri Muruganar in verse 831 of Mey Tava Vilakkam, where he says, “The real ‘I’ is such a knowledge which knows neither other things nor itself”.
Since Self-knowledge is non-dual, it is a knowledge which shines without the triad [triputi] – the knower, the act of knowing and the object known – and hence it is quite different from other kinds of knowledge, all of which involve the act of knowing.
~ Sri Sadhu Om, commentary on Guru Vachaka Kovai verse 1038
Conscious sleep (Jagrat Sushupti) is Self-knowledge | Sri Ramana Maharshi | Guru Vachaka Kovai
959. O men who, caught by the dangerous snares of the world and struck by the sharp arrows of cruel miseries, are suffering greatly and are wandering in search of the attainment of supreme bliss, the sleep in which there is no loss of consciousness [i.e. wakeful sleep or jagrat-sushupti] alone is the imperishable happiness.
~Sri Ramana Maharshi, Guru Vachaka Kovai
Commentary by Sri Sadhu Om:
”The sleep in which there is no loss of consciousness’ [arivu-azhiya tukkam] means only the state of Self-knowledge.
‘Here consciousness [arivu] means prajna or the knowledge of one’s own existence, and not the knowledge of other things.
‘That which knows other things is not true knowledge [see Ulladu Narpadu verse 12]. The state we call sleep is the state in which we know no other things, not even the body.
‘The state we call waking is the state in which, along with the knowledge of one’s own existence [‘I am’], there is also knowledge of other things.
‘The state in which we remain conscious merely of our own existence, like in waking, but in which the mind [the knower of other things] does not rise, like in sleep, is called the state of conscious sleep or wakeful sleep.
‘Since no other thing is known in this state, it is a sleep; and since one’s own existence is shining clearly there, it is a state of consciousness or waking.’
960. Those who are sleeping, having given up the habit of [going out through] the deceitful senses and having become established in the heart-lotus, are those who are awake in the abode of real knowledge [mey-jnana]. Others are those who are asleep, being immersed in the dense darkness of this unreal world [poy-jnala].
~Sri Ramana Maharshi, Guru Vachaka Kovai
The Genius of Sri Ramana Maharshi’s Teachings | The Dove and the Hunter | Occasional Verse
Sri Ramana Maharshi: perceiving and creation are one and the same
147. Creation is not other than seeing; seeing and creating are one and the same process. Annihilation is only the cessation of seeing and nothing else, for the world comes to an end by the right awareness of oneself.
330. There is no creation apart from seeing; seeing and creation are one and the same. And because that seeing is due to ignorance, to cease seeing is the truth of the dissolution (of the world).
~Sri Ramana Maharshi, verses taken from Sri Ramana Paravidyopanishad
To understand these verses more deeply see these posts here and here
The Purpose behind the Various and Diverse Theories of Creation in the Vedas | Advaita Vedanta | Sri Ramana Maharshi
Why do the different portions of the Vedas describe creation in different ways? Their sole intention is not to proclaim a correct theory of creation, but to make the aspirant enquire into the Truth which is the Source of creation.
~ Sri Ramana Maharshi, Guru Vachaka Kovai, Verse 102
Here, in one of the earliest texts Sri Ramana authored he wrote the following in response to the following question:
Question: If the entire universe is of the form of mind, then does it not follow that the universe is an illusion? If that be the case, why is the creation of the universe mentioned in the Veda?
Sri Ramana Maharshi: There is no doubt whatsoever that the universe is the merest illusion. The principal purport of the Veda is to make known the true Brahman, after showing the apparent universe to be false. It is for this purpose that the Vedas admit the creation of the world and not for any other reason.
Moreover, for the less qualified persons creation is taught, that is the phased evolution of prakriti (primal nature), mahat-tattva (the great intellect), tanmatras (the subtle essences), bhutas (the gross elements), the world, the body, etc., from Brahman: while for the more qualified simultaneous creation is taught, that is, that this world arose like a dream on account of one’s own thoughts induced by the defect of not knowing oneself as the Self. Thus, from the fact that the creation of the world has been described in different ways it is clear that the purport of the Vedas rests only in teaching the true nature of Brahman after showing somehow or other the illusory nature of the universe.
That the world is illusory, every one can directly know in the state of realization which is in the form of experience of one’s bliss-nature.
~ Sri Ramana Maharshi, Self Enquiry (Vichara Sangraham)
Sri Sadhu Om also wrote a commentary on the above verse of Guru Vachaka Kovai (verse 102), as follows:
‘If creation were true, the scriptures would describe it in only one manner, but their diverse theories make it clear that creation is not the truth. To enable ripe aspirants to discover the falsity of the notion of creation, the Vedas purposely teach contradictory theories. However, such contradictions are found only in the descriptions of creation, they never occur when the Vedas attempt to describe the nature of Self, the Supreme. Concerning Self, they all agree and speak in one voice, saying ‘Self is One, Perfect, Whole, Immortal, Unchanging, Self-shining etc., etc.’ From this we should understand that the deep intention behind such conflicting theories of creation is to indirectly show aspirants the necessity of enquiring into Self, which is the Source of all ideas of creation.’
Tom Das 