Let us now understand the subject and object concept of the Brahman. What we are not able to see is not an object. If Brahman is object it has to be seen first before realizing. We are not able to see Brahman. Scriptures also never gave any form to Brahman. Secondly anything could be an object except our own self. Why ‘I’ is not called the object because we use our knowledge in realising the Brahman. How do we get our knowledge? We get knowledge from the objects around us. Tree is an object and we gain knowledge about tree by seeing it. We use our sensory organs to gain knowledge. Knowledge is gained out of the objects only. All objects will perish one day as they exist physically. In the same way, if you look at Brahman as an object, He has to exist physically. If He exists physically, he has to perish one day. Brahman is not visible to us nor is he going to perish like all other living beings. This is yet another confirmation that Brahman is not an object.
Only for our convenience we make Him as object by defining various forms. But these forms are not without deeper significance which we shall discuss later. On the basis of the foregoing we can conclude that Brahman is not an object. If He is not an object, then is he the subject? Let us find out. Subject is defined as matter for discussion and a cause to experience. Brahman is the subject taken up for discussion and we are waiting to experience the Brahman. Therefore Brahman could be the subject. But we need more proof to confirm this. You call a tree as an object. How do you know it is an object? You are able to see the tree, the object with your eyes. Who is experiencing the vision of the tree? It is you, your sense organ eye experiencing the vision of the tree. So it is you who is experiencing. Does it mean that you are the subject? Possibly yes. You could be the subject. If you are subject, then what is the position of the Brahman? We have been referring the Brahman as the subject.
When Brahman, the Supreme is the subject, how can you too be the subject? Does it mean that the subject, you as an individual and the Brahman are one and the same? Does it mean that the knower and the known are the same? Who is the knower? You are the knower. Who is the known? Brahman is the known. How we can call the Brahman as the known? We cannot call him the known at this stage. He can be called as known only after really knowing him. Discussion about the Brahman does not mean that you know him. By these discussions we are only trying to realise the universal existence of the Brahman. The Brahman within you or me or the tree is one and the same as he exists much smaller than an atom.