Some more 'Mahavakyas'

[V Subrahmanian]

In the Brihadaranyaka bhashya for 1.4.10 where the famous 'aham brahmasmi' occurs, there is a very lengthy discussion.  Bhagavatpada cites several Upanishadic and Bh/gita passages to support the jiva-brahma non-difference.  These are quite other than the famous four, representing each Veda: 

किन्तु नैव अब्रह्म अविद्यकर्ता चेतनो भ्रान्तोऽन्य इष्यते — ‘नान्योऽतोऽस्ति विज्ञाता’ (बृ. उ. ३ । ७ । २३) ‘नान्यदतोऽस्ति विज्ञातृ’ (बृ. उ. ३ । ८ । ११) ‘तत्त्वमसि’ (छा. उ. ६ । ८ । ७) ‘आत्मानमेवावेत् अहं ब्रह्मास्मि’ (बृ. उ. १ । ४ । १०) ‘अन्योऽसावन्योऽहमस्मीति, न स वेद’ (बृ. उ. १ । ४ । १०) इत्यादिश्रुतिभ्यः ; स्मृतिभ्यश्च — ‘समं सर्वेषु भूतेषु’ (भ. गी. १३ । २७) ‘अहमात्मा गुडाकेश’ (भ. गी. १० । २०) ‘शुनि चैव श्वपाके च’ (भ. गी. ५ । १८) ; ‘यस्तु सर्वाणि भूतानि’ (ई. उ. ६) ‘यस्मिन्सर्वाणि भूतानि’ (ई. उ. ७) इति च मन्त्रवर्णात् 

The above passages highlight the idea: Brahman alone is the (only) sentient entity in every body.  That is, in truth, there are no two sentient entities in every body, as proposed for example, by the Mundaka mantra 'dva suparna'.  Here, the jiva-bird is actually only Brahman alone, wrongly identifying itself with the body-mind complex, coming to be called 'jiva.'

In the same 1.4.10 bhashya, Shankara cites some more passages, ultimately to mean the same identity between jiva and Brahman: 

‘अयमात्मा ब्रह्म’ (बृ. उ. २ । ५ । १९) ‘यत्साक्षादपरोक्षाद्ब्रह्म’‘य आत्मा’ (बृ. उ. ३ । ४ । १) ‘तत्सत्यं स आत्मा’ (छा. उ. ६ । ८ । ७) ‘ब्रह्मविदाप्नोति परम्’ (तै. उ. २ । १ । १) इति प्रकृत्य ‘तस्माद्वा एतस्मादात्मनः’ (तै. उ. २ । १ । १) इति सहस्रशो ब्रह्मात्मशब्दयोः सामानाधिकरण्यात् एकार्थत्वमेवेत्यवगम्यते ; अन्यस्य वै अन्यत्र सम्पत् क्रियते, नैकत्वे ; ‘इदं सर्वं यदयमात्मा’ (बृ. उ. २ । ४ । ६) इति च प्रकृतस्यैव द्रष्टव्यस्यात्मन एकत्वं दर्शयति ;  

  

In the Brahmasutra bhashya 3.2.27, the opponent suggests that these passages teach identity: क्वचित्तु तयोरेवाभेदो व्यपदिश्यते — ‘तत्त्वमसि’ (छा. उ. ६ । ८ । ७) ‘अहं ब्रह्मास्मि’ (बृ. उ. १ । ४ । १०) ‘एष त आत्मा सर्वान्तरः’ (बृ. उ. ३ । ४ । १) ‘एष त आत्मान्तर्याम्यमृतः’ (बृ. उ. ३ । ७ । ३) इति ।

This is acceptable to the Siddhantin and it is not refuted in the sutras coming thereafter. So, here we get another important passage, the last cited above, where the Upanishad teaches: the Antaryami in every body is truly the Atma in that body. The reasoning is: the Antaryami is the only Consciousness there that impels the body-mind-organs complex of that jiva in every body. So, the impelled ones being inert, the only sentient entity there is the Antaryami. This Antaryami Chaitanyam is the Nirguna Brahman, verily the Atman in that body.  Normally we would consider the Antaryami to be the Saguna Brahman, Ishwara, on the basis of the Mandukya mantra: एष सर्वेश्वर एष सर्वज्ञ एषोऽन्तर्याम्येष योनिः सर्वस्य प्रभवाप्ययौ हि भूतानाम् ॥ ६ ॥ where the Ishwara is defined as: the Omniscient, Lord of everything, Antaryami, the source of creation, etc.  But even here Bhagavatpada comments for the Antaryami: अत एव एषः अन्तर्यामी, अन्तरनुप्रविश्य सर्वेषां भूतानां यमयिता नियन्ताप्येष एव । He impels all beings having entered all bodies.  But the Bri.Up. antaryami stated above is being taught there itself as: This Antaryami is your Atma.  Surely one cannot be different from one's atma.  Thus Antaryami is none other than the jiva (who is a mixture of sentience and insentience).  

Thus we see that there are many many passages from the Upanishads and the Gita that qualify to be called 'mahavakyas'.  The above is still not exhaustive.  We have many more across the prasthana traya bhashya. 

regards

subbu