World of Philosophy

Author(s): Christopher Key Chapple, Intaj Malek, Dilip Charan, Sunanda Shastri, Prashant Dave
Publisher: Shanti Prakashan

Page 532

The most important Mahāvākya is tattvamasi and is found in the Āruni Uddālaka-Svetaketu episode of the Chandogya Upanisad (V1,8-16), where it has been repeated nine times. In fact it is the repetitive factor of such sentences that qualifies them to be called a Mahāvākya. In the Bible this is the case with the term 'holy', repeated thrice “Holy, holy, holy be Thy name," We may note here that Sankara does not use the term 'mahāvākya' in any formidable sense; he rather calls these sentences 'vedānta-vākyas'. The only place where he has made use of this term is Brahma-Sūtra-Bhasya, (I, 3,33) as a pūrva-paksa, and not in the vulgate sense. His commentator Sureśvara also does not employ this term. It is Sarvajñātman (second half of the ninth and the earliest part of the tenth cent.; a disciple of Sureśvara) who has introduced the term with a strong view that understanding of all else in the Advaita system is incidental to the proper understanding of such statements which incorporate within them the whole truth of the system itself. He makes a clear and central distinction between Mahāvākyas and avāntaravākyas (e.g., neti neti, Brhadaranyaka Up. II, 3, vi). The avāntaravākyas contribute to the understanding of the meaning of the Mahāvākyas. These are of two types, one is of positive import - the vidhi-mukha (e.g., satyam jñānaṁ anantaṁ Brahma, Taitt. Up., II, 1) and the other is of negative import - the nisedha-mukha (not this, not this). He is also responsible for introducing the implication theory, Jahadajahallaksanā for the hermeneutics of the Mahāvākyas (cf, his Pañcaprakriyā). The unitary meaning of the Mahāvākyas is derived by making use of lakṣaṇā. It is bhāga-tyāga (or jahadajahad) laksanā that is able to explain the identity or non-difference of the finite and the infinite. Sarvajñātman holds that the acceptance of laksanavrtti with only the secondary usage (implication) which is partially noninclusive and partially inclusive is applicable to interpret the mahāvākyas. It is jahadajahallaksana which indicates an impartite sense (akhandārtha) without contradiction, and not other laksanās, namely, identity of case (sāmányadhikaranya) or indirect indication (višeśana-visesyatā).
. The primary meaning (vācyārtha) of 'tat' is consciousness associated with ignorance as well as dissociated (turīya). Both these aspects manifest together as is the case with hot iron (tapta-lauha-pinda). While making use of laksana in the context, the remoteness (paroksatva) and the causal parts of 'tat are discarded and the substance (consciousness) is retained. Likewise, ‘tvam includes ignorance, the three stages of prājña, taijas and viśva caitanya as well as the fourth (turīya), as in the case of hot iron. While making use of laksanā in the case of 'tvam, ignorance, finitude (aparoksatva) and the three states of consciousness are discarded and the turīya caitanya is retained. Thus there is the identity of the two (akhanda-caitanya-bodha). The unity of Brahman and Atman, as expressed in the compound word 'brahmātmaikyam is taken to be the fundamental dogma of the Vedānta system. Sankara, in his commentary on the fourth aphorism of the Vedānta-sūtras (tattu samanvayāt)
483