[Advaita-l] upanishad mahAvAkya

Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian rama.balasubramanian at gmail.com
Tue Aug 31 15:29:47 CDT 2004

The reference is the "sukarahasyopani"sad, whch has been quoted by
authors like Vidyaara.nya. The four mahaavaakya-s are merely "one
sample" each of many advaitic statements from each veda. It just shows
that all the vedas are unanimous in declaring the ultimate meaning of
the vedas is advaita. No author says that these are the only advaitic

The pa~nciikara.nam also singles out these four statements.

As a side note: personally, I don't understand this obsession with
post and pre-"sa.mkara advaitins. Should anyone not explain anything
differently compared to "sa.mkara? Does that make them non-advaitins?
All advaitins are unanimous in declaring the ultimate unreality of the
world and the unity of aatman. When it comes to explaining the
empirical world and why there seems to be a perception of an empirical
world, there are differences.

A Western education seems to compound the post/pre "sa.mkara muddle.
It is a fact that the teachers not only teach from bhaa.syas, but also
from their direct experience of the truth. Not just that, they address
various types of students. It would be best to leave this post/pre
debates and get on with the actual stuff. Just my opinion, no offence
intended. It's nothing new that there are many differences in the way
advaita is taught. It is a good thing. Citsukha has commented way back
in the 1200's on this and has also explained why it is so.


On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 11:22:51 +0530, bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com
<bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:
> praNAms
> Hare Krishna
> Kindly clarify whether shankara anywhere in prasthAna traya bhAshya says
> *only four vAkya-s* from four vEda-s are the mahA vAkya-s?? If yes, please
> give me the reference.  If no, then why in advaita we say only four vAkya-s
> are upanishad mahAvAkyas??  is it a contribution of post shankara
> vyAkhyAnakAra-s??
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> bhaskar

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list