The sages pondered deeply the nature of the aggregate—how the coming together of parts, even if attributed to multiple causes, does not necessarily lead to the true attainment of the whole. Some might argue that mutual causality makes this appropriate, but the wise refuted this, pointing out that the mere existence of the aggregate is not itself the cause of its coming into being. They observed that as the later stage arises, the earlier one ceases to exist. If the earlier does not exist, then the assertion that the later arises from it is obstructed; otherwise, if both exist simultaneously, then simultaneity becomes an issue. The cessation of states, whether with clear discrimination or without, is never interrupted in the flow of existence. In both cases, faults arise—there are inconsistencies that cannot be resolved. In the vastness of space, the sages noted, there is no distinction to be found. Memory and recollection further reveal the truth of existence and non-existence. That which does not exist is not observed, and thus, its existence is denied. This conclusion, they said, applies even to those who remain indifferent or unattached. Conversely, non-existence cannot be claimed, for it is apprehended as existence. Dreams and similar experiences cannot be compared to this, for their nature is fundamentally different. If something truly exists, it should be apprehended; if it is not, then its existence is denied. Reason supports this in every way. It is impossible for such existence to be found in one alone, and thus, the all-pervasiveness of the Self is established. Even succession does not resolve contradictions, for transformation and other factors persist. If, in the ultimate state, both are said to be eternal, then no distinction can be made between them. This is not fitting for the Lord, the sages declared, nor is the idea of a suitable substratum reasonable. If the Self were akin to an instrument, this too is refuted, for the experiences of enjoyment and so on cannot be explained. Such a view would lead to either limitation or a lack of omniscience, both of which are impossible for the Self. Origination, in this context, is not possible, and the instrument is never the true agent. If, however, there is cognition and other faculties, their existence cannot be denied. Yet, mutual contradictions arise, making such a position untenable. Turning to the elements, the sages said: the Self does not arise from space, for the scriptures do not declare such a thing. Yet, the Self does exist. This is supported by the possibility of secondary meanings and the use of words. For some, this is as with the word ‘Brahman’—the ultimate reality. There is no violation of the essential proposition, for there is no real separation. The words themselves guide us. Distinctions persist only as long as modifications remain, just as in worldly experience. By understanding this, the nature of air is also explained. However, impossibility arises when existence does not fit the context. Therefore, the origin of fire is acknowledged, as the tradition teaches. Then water, then earth—each element is accounted for, as indicated by other scriptural words and the context in which they appear. Ultimately, the sages concluded, true understanding comes only from meditation upon that—upon the Self or Brahman—for the signs and indications in the scriptures point to this profound truth.