1. That which consists of the mind is Brahman, because there is taught in this text that Brahman which is well known throughout the scriptures as the cause of the universe.
The Chhandogya passage begins with the declaration, “All this indeed is Brahman.” Therefore the later description of the being consisting of mind, having Prana as body, and luminous in form must continue the same Brahman-topic.
It would be improper for the text to suddenly abandon Brahman and introduce the individual soul without indication.
2. Moreover, the qualities intended to be expressed are befitting only in the case of Brahman.
The attributes described—mind-formed, Prana-bodied, luminous, true in resolve, and subtle like ether—are all appropriate only to Brahman as the object of meditation.
3. On the other hand, the individual soul is not referred to, because these qualities are not appropriate to it.
The embodied self, limited by ignorance and individuality, cannot truly possess these universal marks.
4. The text mentions both the attainer and the object attained, showing that the Manomaya being is different from the individual soul.
The Upanishad says, “When I depart from here, I shall attain Him.” Therefore the object attained must be distinct from the empirical self that seeks.
5. The grammatical distinction of the words also shows difference between the individual self and the one meditated upon.
Parallel passages clearly distinguish the being within from the individual self in whom it is contemplated.
6. The Smriti also teaches that the Lord is seated in the hearts of all beings.
This confirms that the indwelling presence is Brahman and not the limited soul.
7. If it is objected that the text refers to the individual soul because of the smallness of the heart-abode, this is not so.
The minuteness is imagined only for the sake of meditation, just as the all-pervading ether may be spoken of as confined within a small opening.
8. If it is said that Brahman, being in all hearts, would also experience pleasure and pain, this is not so because of the difference in nature.
Pleasure and pain belong only to the empirical agent shaped by ignorance. Brahman, being pure and actionless, remains untouched.