vedAnta mahAvAkya - A query

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms

Hare Krishna

 

We have four mahAvAkya-s from 4 veda-s.  For example tattvamasi from sAma, ahaM brahmAsmi from Yajurveda etc.  But who first advocated these are the ONLY four mahAvAkya-s from vedAnta / shruti??  I don’t think prasthAna traya bhAshyakAra anywhere categorically said these are the ONLY four mahAvAkya-s and nothing else.  In sUtra devatAdhikaraNa (first chapter) bhAshya, bhagavatpAda uses the word ‘mahAvAkya’  but used in the context of grammar.  Here when determining the ‘mantrArtha’ pUrvapaxi expresses some doubt about it, in that context, based on grammatical issues he uses the word mahAvAkya, mahAvAkya here means ‘whole sentence’ or group of sentences which gives the same meaning as avAntara vAkya-s ( sub sentence or upa vAkya) etc.  apart from this I don’t think bhAshyakAra insisted that the whole vedAnta/ Upanishad has only four mahAvAkya-s which is jnana pradhAna and meditating on it gives the self-realization etc.  tattvamasi, ayamAtma brahma, prajnAnaM brahma, ahaM brahmAsmi ascribed to four Amnaya mutts etc. have the reference only in shankara’s biographies not credible enough to come to conclusion.  Since these vAkya-s also avAntara vAkya-s (part and parcel of mantra samucchaya in the upanishads) why only these four vAkya-s to be considered as mahAvAkya-s??  Is it because of these vAkya-s teaching abedha, Ikyata, parabrahma tattva directly??  I don’t think this would be the only reason!!  Atman is not prajnAna ghana says maNdUkya though we find prajnAnam brahma in itareya shruti and Atman is prajnAna ghana in mAndUkya itself.  And bhAshyakAra interestingly along with tattvamasi (mahAvakya) used some other vaakya-s also which give same meaning as tattvamasi. For example : tattvamasi, neti neti, AtmaivedaM, ekamedvAdviteeyaM, brahmaivedamamrutaM, nAnyadatOsti drashtru, tadeva brahmatvaM viddhi etyaadi vAkyAnAm tad viditvAt (br.bhaashya).  See here shankara without explicitly saying tattvamasi as mahAvAkya uses it casually with other same meaning giving vAkya-s.  And more importantly bhAshyakAra at somany places uses shAstra janita jnana, vedAnta vAkya shravaNa, vAkya janita jnana etc. but nowhere insist only four!!! Under these circumstances why this special emphasis on ONLY four vAkya-s when the corpus of whole vedAnta /shruti is the untya pramANa in tradition!!??

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

 

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Bhaskar ji,

There are many mahAvAkya-s, not four alone. Four are chosen as representative of all mahAvAkya-s. Their popularity may because of their association with the four AmnAyA maTha-s as outlined in the maThAmnAya anushAsanam -

https://sanskritdocuments.org/doc_z_misc_shankara/maThAmnAyamahAnushAsanam.pdf

See verses 4, 12, 21, 31.

Regards,

Venkatraghavan

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "advaitin" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to advaitin+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/AM7PR06MB6581E1D76C4941A274281EFC84979%40AM7PR06MB6581.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.

[V Subrahmanian]

Sri Uttamajna, an ancient commentator on the Panchapadika of Padmapadacharya, has used this term mahavakya in the sense of brahmaikya.  He is believed to be a lay disciple of Jnanottama, an Acharya of the Sringeri Peetham of the 10th Century CE. 

ज्ञानोत्तमार्यशिष्योऽहमुत्तमज्ञसमाह्वयः ।
वक्तव्यकाशिकां पञ्चपादिकायाः करोमि वः ॥ ३ ॥  [mangala shloka in the Vaktavyakaashikaa, available in the Advaitasharada resource. ]

निष्प्रपञ्चब्रह्मणा एकतां गच्छन् जीवः स्वगतानर्थहेतुभूताग्रहणरूपाविद्यामहं मनुष्य इत्याद्यन्यथाग्रहणं च निर्लेपं निश्शेषं पराकृत्यैव पश्चात् ब्रह्मैक्येन महावाक्यरूपशास्त्रेण प्रमीयत इत्यर्थः ।

--

[Bhaskar YR]

Purvapakshis argue the whole Veda is equally important. Why are you saying Veda has Mahavakyas and subordinate Vakyas? Every Vakya is equal to others. This is a case when Advaitis become Bheda Vadins and Dvaitins become Abheda Vadins. Reversal of roles is happening. Advaitins see Taratamya in Veda Vakyas.

 

praNAms

Hare Krishna

 

Advaitins see tAratamya in veda vAkya-s!!?? I don’t think so. Tradition says that all Upanishad / vedaanta vakya-s are aiming to teach only one thing i.e. ikyata.. accordingly we have to do samanvaya but not that one is superior to another.  Please elaborate why you are thinking so??

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

Bhaskar YR

 

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste

This argument is not appropriate - what advaitin-s argue is that the prAmANya of the Veda is in revealing the tAtparya viShaya. 

That aikya is the mukhyatAtparya can be established by the sixfold tAtparya linga-s. Therefore sentences that reveal that aikya have prAmANya.

By saying that much where is the prAmANya of avAntaravAkya denied? They have tAtparya in avAntara viShaya like revealing karma etc.

The classification of Vedic sentences into mahAvAkya and avAntaravAkya is not to imply that only the former has prAmANya and the latter does not. It is to imply that the former is revealing the mukhyatAtparya and the latter is revealing the avAntaratAtparya.

This is not a case where advaitin-s become bheda vAdin-s and dvaitin-s become abheda vAdin-s.

What the dvaitin-s argue is that mahAvaakya sentences should give up their primary meaning of revealing aikya, because they are in conflict with those Vedic sentences that talk of bheda. We do not agree that they are in conflict at all. We say the mukhyatAtparya is talking of a pAramArthika vastu and sentences talking of bheda are talking of vyAvahArika bheda - and the pAramArthika satya can coexist with vyAvahArika satya. Thus, in the advaitin's interpretation, both types of sentences have sAvakAshatva, scope of application, whereas the dvaitin's interpretation will require that the mukhyatAtparya is renounced.

Regards,

Venkatraghavan

On Wed, 27 Jul 2022, 09:21 Venkatesh Murthy via Advaita-l, <adva...@lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

Namaste

Purvapakshis argue the whole Veda is equally important. Why are you saying
Veda has Mahavakyas and subordinate Vakyas? Every Vakya is equal to others.
This is a case when Advaitis become Bheda Vadins and Dvaitins become Abheda
Vadins. Reversal of roles is happening. Advaitins see Taratamya in Veda

Vakyas. Mahavakyas are Supreme in importance because they teach Abheda of
Jeeva and Brahman. Other Vakyas teaching Bheda are subordinates to
Mahavakyas. Dvaitins are asking - Why do you make this Bheda in Veda
Vakyas? It is a funny situation. It is all because of Ishwara's Maayaa. She
makes you laugh at the world.

> _______________________________________________
> Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listm...@advaita-vedanta.org
>


--
Regards

-Venkatesh
_______________________________________________
Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/

To unsubscribe or change your options:
https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l

For assistance, contact:
listm...@advaita-vedanta.org