The wise ones, seeking to understand the nature of the Supreme, reflected upon the path that leads to the Highest. They saw that the journey of the soul follows a course similar to that which is described in the sacred texts. Again and again, the scriptures declare that the Supreme is full of bliss, and this is affirmed by repeated assertion. If doubts arise because some words suggest change or modification, it is not so, for the essence remains predominant and unchanged. The cause of all, the origin from which everything springs, is clearly indicated in the teachings. The mantras themselves are sung in praise of this truth, and no other interpretation is reasonable, for none other fits the context. The scriptures also speak of distinction, marking out the Supreme as unique. When desire arises to know, one need not rely on inference, for the revealed word is clear and direct. In these matters, the scriptures teach the connection between the Supreme and all that exists. The teaching points inward, for it is concerned with the innermost attribute. Where difference is designated, it is to show that the Supreme is other than all else. Space, too, is spoken of as an indicator, and for the same reason, the vital force is mentioned. Light is described, with reference to its course, as another pointer to the Supreme. If it is objected that references to metre suggest something else, this is not so, for the offering of the mind is explicitly stated, and such is the vision of the seers. The appropriateness of calling the Supreme the cause of the elements and all things is thus established. Should one argue that differences in teaching suggest otherwise, the answer is that there is no real contradiction, for the essence remains one in all cases. Again, the vital force is connected in the teachings that follow. If it is claimed that the teacher refers only to his own self, this is not correct, for the teachings are grounded in the relationship to the true Self. The scripture presents its view, just as the sage Vamadeva realized his own unity with the Supreme. If marks of the individual soul and the chief vital force are cited as objections, it is clarified that meditation is threefold, based on both, and thus their connection is established. Everywhere, the teachings about the Supreme are well known. The attributes intended in the texts are appropriate to the Supreme alone. The embodied soul cannot be the subject, for such an identity is impossible. The agent and doer of actions is distinctly designated, further clarifying the matter. The use of words in the texts is precise and distinctive, and this is supported by what is remembered and passed down. If someone argues that childhood or certain designations contradict this, it is not so, for even space can be instructed, and so too can the soul. If it is suggested that enjoyment is the goal, this is not correct, for the Supreme is always distinguished from mere enjoyers. The Supreme is the eater, the one who grasps both the moving and the unmoving. The context of the teachings supports this understanding. The two selves, the individual and the Supreme, are said to enter the cave of the heart, for such is seen in the Upanishads. The presence of a qualifier further clarifies the distinction. The Supreme is known by its inner presence, and by the designation of place and other attributes. The mention of being distinguished by happiness is yet another mark. Therefore, it is established: this is Brahman, the Supreme. The course of the soul, as described in the Upanishads, confirms this truth. No other entity fits, for all others are limited and subject to change, while the Supreme is endless and beyond impossibility. Thus, the scriptures reveal the true nature of Brahman, the source and essence of all.