Advaita Vedanta

====The ''Mahavyakas'' - the identity of Ātman and Brahman ====
''Moksha'', liberation from suffering and rebirth and attaining immortality, is attained by disidentification from the body-mind complex and gaining self-knowledge as being in essence ''Atman'', and attaining knowledge of the identity of ''Atman'' and [[Brahman]].{{sfn|Comans|2000|p=183}}{{sfn|Rambachan|2006|p=26}} According to Shankara, the individual Ātman and Brahman seem different at the empirical level of reality, but this difference is only an illusion, and at the highest level of reality they are really identical.{{sfn|Mayeda|1992|p=14}} The real self is ''Sat'', "the Existent," that is, ''Atman-Brahman''.{{sfn|Mayeda|1992|p=12, 172}}{{sfn|Deutsch|1973|p=49}}{{refn|group=note|name=Brahman}} Whereas the difference between Atman and non-Atman is deemed self-evident, knowledge of the identity of Atman and Brahman is revealed by the ''shruti'', especially the Upanishadic statement ''tat tvam asi''.

=====''Mahavakyas''=====
According to Shankara, a large number of Upanishadic statements reveal the identity of ''Atman'' and ''Brahman''. In the Advaita Vedanta tradition, four of those statements, the ''[[Mahavakyas]]'', which are taken literal, in contrast to other statements, have a special importance in revealing this identity.{{sfn|Long|2020|p=245}}{{sfn|Braue|1984|p=81}} They are:
* तत्त्वमसि, ''[[Tattvamasi|tat tvam asi]]'', [[Chandogya Upanishad|Chandogya VI.8.7]]. Traditionally rendered as "That Thou Art" (that you are),{{sfn|Brereton|1986}}{{sfn|Olivelle|2008|p=349 note 8.7-16.3}}{{sfn|Black|2012|p=36}} with ''[[Tattva|tat]]'' in Ch.U.6.8.7 referring to ''[[Satya|sat]]'', "the Existent"{{sfn|Lipner|2000|pp=55 note 9; 57}}{{sfn|Deutsch|Dalvi|2004|p=8}}{{sfn|Olivelle|2008|p=151-152; p.349 note 8.7-16.3}}); correctly translated as "That's how [thus] you are,"{{sfn|Brereton|1986}}{{sfn|Black|2012|p=36}}{{sfn|Olivelle|1998|p=152}} with ''tat'' in Ch.U.6.12.3, its original location from where it was copied to other verses,{{sfn|Brereton|1986}} referring to "the very nature of all existence as permeated by [the finest essence]"{{sfn|Bhatawadekar|2013|p=203, note 14}}{{sfn|Brereton|1986|p=107}}
* अहं ब्रह्मास्मि, ''[[aham brahmāsmi]]'', [[Brhadaranyaka Upanishad|Brhadāranyaka I.4.10]], "I am Brahman," or "I am  Divine."{{sfn|Braue|1984|p=80}}
* प्रज्ञानं ब्रह्म, ''prajñānam brahma'', [[Aitareya Upanishad|Aitareya V.3]], "''Prajñānam''{{refn|group=note|"Consciousness",{{sfn|Grimes|1996|p=234}}<ref group=web name="Jiddu">{{Cite web |url=http://www.jiddu-krishnamurti.net/en/1969/1969-07-26-jiddu-krishnamurti-can-one-experience-the-infinite |title=Jiddu Krishnamurti, ''Saanen 2nd Conversation with Swami Venkatesananda 26 July 1969'' |access-date=3 January 2019 |archive-date=6 November 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181106223706/http://jiddu-krishnamurti.net/en/1969/1969-07-26-jiddu-krishnamurti-can-one-experience-the-infinite |url-status=live }}</ref> "intelligence",{{sfn|Sivaraman|1973|p=146}}{{sfn|Braue|1984|p=80}} "wisdom"}} ''is Brahman''."{{refn|group=note|"the Absolute",{{sfn|Grimes|1996|p=234}}<ref group=web name="Jiddu" /> "infinite",<ref group=web name="Jiddu" /> "the Highest truth"<ref group=web name="Jiddu" />}}
* अयमात्मा ब्रह्म, ''ayamātmā brahma'', [[Mandukya Upanishad|Mandukya II]], "This Atman is Brahman."

=====''That you are''=====
The longest chapter of Shankara's ''[[Upadesasahasri]]'', chapter 18, "That Art Thou," is devoted to considerations on the insight "I am ever-free, the existent" (''[[Sat (Sanskrit)|sat]]''), and the identity expressed in [[Chandogya Upanishad#Sixth Prapāṭhaka|Chandogya Upanishad 6.8.7]] in the ''[[Mahāvākyas|mahavakya]]'' (great sentence) "''tat tvam asi''", "that thou art."{{sfn|Mayeda|1992|p=50, 172}}{{sfn|Lipner|2000|p=57}} In this statement, according to Shankara, ''tat'' refers to '''[[Satya|Sat]]'',{{sfn|Lipner|2000|p=57}} "the Existent"{{sfn|Lipner|2000|pp=55 note 9; 57}}{{sfn|Deutsch|Dalvi|2004|p=8}}{{sfn|Olivelle|2008|p=151-152}}{{sfn|Mayeda|1992|p=172, Up.18.3, 18.6, 18.7}} Existence, Being,<ref group=web name="ShankaraBasya">{{cite web |url=http://shankarabhashya.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=343e9e12ffd6b71c499e1722e8813e90&topic=87.0 |title=Topic: CHAPTER 6 - SECTION 8 |date=April 7, 2019 |website=Shankarabhashya.com |access-date=4 January 2022 |archive-date=9 February 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220209212211/http://shankarabhashya.com/index.php?topic=87.0 |url-status=live }}</ref> or Brahman,{{sfn|Mayeda|1992|p=172, Up.18.6}} the Real, the "Root of the world,"{{sfn|Lipner|2000|p=57}}{{refn|group=note|While the Vedanta tradition equates ''sat'' ("the Existent") with Brahman, the Chandogya Upanishad itself does not refer to Brahman.{{sfn|Deutsch|Dalvi|2004|p=8}}{{sfn|Black|2012|p=36}} {{harvtxt|Deutsch|Dalvi|2004|p=8}}: "Although the text does not use the term ''brahman'', the Vedanta tradition is that the Existent (''sat'') referred to is no other than Brahman."}} the true essence or root or origin of everything that exists.{{sfn|Deutsch|Dalvi|2004|p=8}}{{sfn|Olivelle|2008|p=151-152}}<ref group=web name="ShankaraBasya"/> "Tvam" refers to one's real I, ''pratyagatman'' or inner Self,{{sfn|Lipner|2000|pp=60, 62}} the "direct Witness within everything,"{{sfn|Lipner|2000|p=60}} "free from caste, family, and purifying ceremonies,"{{sfn|Mayeda|1992|p=218 (up.II.1.24)}} the essence, ''Atman'', which the individual at the core is.{{sfnp|Muller|1879|pp=92-109 with footnotes}}{{sfn|Goodall|1996|pp=136–137}} As Shankara states in the ''[[Upadesasahasri]]'': 
{{blockquote|Up.I.174: "Through such sentences as "Thou art That" one knows one's own ''Atman'', the Witness of all the internal organs." Up.I.18.190: "Through such sentences as "[Thou art] the Existent" [...] right knowledge concerning the inner ''Atman'' will become clearer." Up.I.18.193-194: "In the sentence "Thou art That" [...] [t]he word "That" means inner ''Atman''."{{sfn|Mayeda|1992|p=190-192}}}}

The statement "tat tvam asi" sheds the false notion that ''Atman'' is different from ''Brahman''.{{sfn|Mayeda|1992|p=91; 219 (Up.II.1.28)}} According toNakamura, the non-duality of ''atman'' and ''Brahman'' "is a famous characteristic of Sankara's thought, but it was already taught by Sundarapandya"{{sfn|Nakamura|1999|p=675}} (c.600 CE or earlier).{{sfn|Nakamura|1999|p=176}} Shankara cites Sundarapandya in his comments to ''Brahma Sutra'' verse I.1.4:
{{blockquote|When the metaphorical or false ''atman'' is non-existent, [the ideas of my] child, [my] body are sublated. Therefore, when it is realized that 'I am the existent ''Brahman, atman''', how can anyduty exist?{{sfn|Nakamura|1999|p=178}}}}

From this, and a large number of other accordances, Nakamura concludes that Shankar was not an original thinker, but "a synthesizer of existing Advaita and the rejuvenator, as well as a defender, of ancient learning."{{sfn|Nakamura|1999|p=679}}

=====Direct perception versus contemplation of the ''Mahavakyas''=====
In the ''Upadesasahasri Shankara'', Shankara is ambivalent on the need for meditation on the Upanishadic ''mahavakya''. He states that "right knowledge arises at the moment of hearing,"{{sfn|Mayeda|1992|p=182 (Up.I.18.103-104)}} and rejects ''prasamcaksa'' or ''prasamkhyana'' meditation, that is, meditation on the meaning of the sentences, and in Up.II.3 recommends ''parisamkhyana'',{{sfn|Mayeda|1992|p=173-174 (Up.I.18.9-19); p.196 note 13}} separating ''Atman'' from everything that is not ''Atman'', that is, the sense-objects and sense-organs, and the pleasant and unpleasant things and merit and demerit connected with them.{{sfn|Mayeda|1992|p=251-253 (Up.II.3)}} Yet, Shankara then concludes with declaring that only ''Atman'' exists, stating that "all the sentences of the ''Upanishads'' concerning non-duality of ''Atman'' should be fully contemplated, should be contemplated."{{sfn|Mayeda|1992|p=253 (Up.II.3)}} As Mayeda states, "how they [''prasamcaksa'' or ''prasamkhyana'' versus ''parisamkhyana''] differ from each other in not known."{{sfn|Mayeda|1992|p=196 note 13}}

''Prasamkhyana'' was advocated by Mandana Misra,{{sfn|Rambachan|1991|p=155}} the older contemporary of Shankara who was the most influential Advaitin until the 10th century.{{sfn|King|2002|p=128}}{{sfn|Roodurmun|2002|pp=33-34}}{{refn|group=note|name="Influence_of_Shankara"}} "According to Mandana, the ''mahavakyas'' are incapable, by themselves, of bringing about ''brahmajnana''. The ''Vedanta-vakyas'' convey an indirect knowledge which is made direct only by deep meditation (''prasamkhyana''). The latter is a continuous contemplation of the purport of the ''mahavakyas''.{{sfn|Rambachan|1991|pp=155-156}} Vācaspati Miśra, a student of Mandana Misra, agreed with Mandana Misra, and their stance is defended by the Bhamati-school, founded by Vācaspati Miśra.{{sfn|Rambachan|1991|p=156}} In contrast, the [[Vivarana]] school founded by Prakasatman (c. 1200–1300){{sfn|Roodurmun|2002|p=40}} follows Shankara closely, arguing that the ''mahavakyas'' are the direct cause of gaining knowledge.{{sfn|Cenkner|1995|p=95}}

Shankara's insistence on direct knowledge as liberating also differs from the ''[[asparsa yoga]]'' described in Gaudapada's ''Mandukyakarika'' III.39-46.{{sfn|Nakamura|2004|p=367}} In this practice of 'non-contact' (''a-[[sparśa]]''), the mind is controlled and brought to rest, and does not create "things" (appearances) after which it grasps; it becomes non-dual, free from the subject-[grasping]-object dualism.{{sfn|Nakamura|2004|pp=365-366}}{{sfn|Reddy Juturi|2021}} Knowing that only ''Atman-Brahman'' is real, the creations of the mind are seen as false appearances (MK III.31-33). When the mind is brought to rest, it becomes or is ''Brahman'' (MK III.46).{{sfn|Nakamura|2004|p=367}}

=====Renouncement of ritualism=====
In the ''Upadesasahasri'' Shankara discourages ritual worship such as oblations to ''Deva'' (God), because that assumes the Self within is different from [[Brahman]].{{refn|group=note|name="ritualism"|Shankara, himself, had renounced all religious ritual acts;{{sfn|Potter|2008|p=16}}<br/>For an example of Shankara's reasoning "why rites and ritual actions should be given up",<ref>Karl Potter on p. 220;{{full citation needed|date=February 2022}}</ref> Elsewhere, Shankara's ''Bhasya'' on various Upanishads repeat "give up rituals and rites".<ref>{{cite book |title=Shankara's Bhasya on Brihadaranyaka Upanishad |translator=S Madhavananda |year=1950 |url=https://archive.org/details/Brihadaranyaka.Upanishad.Shankara.Bhashya.by.Swami.Madhavananda |pages=[https://archive.org/details/Brihadaranyaka.Upanishad.Shankara.Bhashya.by.Swami.Madhavananda/page/348/mode/2up?view=theater 348–350, 754–757]}}</ref>}}{{refn |group=note |name="Mookerji" |1=Compare {{harvnb|Mookerji|2011}} on [[Svādhyāya]] (Vedic learning). {{harvtxt|Mookerji|2011|pp=29–31}} notes that the Rigveda, and Sayana's commentary, contain passages criticizing as fruitless mere recitation of the ''Ŗik'' (words) without understanding their inner meaning or essence, the knowledge of ''dharma'' and ''Parabrahman''. {{harvtxt|Mookerji|2011|pp=29, 34}} concludes that in the Rigvedic education of the mantras "the contemplation and comprehension of [[Nirukta|their meaning]] was considered as more important and vital to education than their mere mechanical repetition and correct pronunciation." {{harvtxt|Mookerji|2011|p=35}} refers to Sayana as stating that "the mastery of texts, ''akshara-praptī'', is followed by ''[[artha]]-[[Buddhi|bodha]]'', perception of their meaning." (''[[Artha]]'' may also mean "goal, purpose or essence," depending on the context.{{sfn|Potter|1998|p=610 (note 17)}}<ref group=web>{{cite web |url=http://spokensanskrit.de/index.php?tinput=artha&direction=SE&script=HK&link=yes&beginning=0 |title=artha |work=Sanskrit English Dictionary |publisher=University of Koeln, Germany |url-status=deviated |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150607221225/http://spokensanskrit.de/index.php?tinput=artha&direction=SE&script=HK&link=yes&beginning=0 |archive-date=2015-06-07}}</ref>) According to {{harvtxt|Mookerji|2011|p=36}}, "the realization of [[rta|Truth]]" and the knowledge of ''[[paramatman]]'' as revealed to the ''rishis'' is the real aim of Vedic learning, and not the mere recitation of texts.}} The "doctrine of difference" is wrong, asserts Shankara, because, "he who knows the Brahman is one and he is another, does not know Brahman".{{sfn|Śaṅkarācārya|1949|pp=16–17}}{{sfn|Potter|2008|pp=219–221}} The false notion that ''Atman'' is different from ''Brahman''{{sfn|Mayeda|1992|p=91; 219 (Up.II.1.28)}} is connected with the novice's conviction that (''Upadesasaharsi II.1.25'')
{{blockquote|...I am one [and] He is another; I am ignorant, experience pleasure and pain, am bound and a transmigrator [whereas] he is essentially different from me, the god not subject to transmigration. By worshipping Him with oblation, offerings, homage and the like through the [performance of] the actions prescribed for [my] class and stage of life, I wish to get out of the ocean of transmigratory existence. How am I he?{{sfn|Mayeda|1992|p=91, 218}}}}

Recognizing oneself as "the Existent-''Brahman''," which is mediated by scriptural teachings, is contrasted with the notion of "I act," which is mediated by relying on sense-perception and the like.{{sfn|Mayeda|1992|p=172-173 (Up.I.18.3-8)}} According to Shankara, the statement "Thou art That" "remove[s] the delusion of a hearer,"{{sfn|Mayeda|1992|p=183 (Up.I.18.99-100)}} "so through sentences as "Thou art That" one knows one's own ''Atman'', the witness of all internal organs,"{{sfn|Mayeda|1992|p=190 (Up.I.18.174)}} and not from any actions.{{sfn|Mayeda|1992|p=192 (Up.I.18.196-197); p.195 (Up.I.18.2019)}}{{refn|group=note|Up.I.18.219: "The renunciation of all actions becomes the means for discriminating the meaning of the word "Thou" since there is an [Upanisadic] teaching, "Having become calm, self-controlled [..., one sees ''Atman'' there in oneself]" (Bhr. Up. IV, 4, 23)."{{sfn|Mayeda|1992|p=195 (Up.I.18.2019)}}}} With this realization, the performance of rituals is prohibited, "since [the use of] rituals and their requisites is contradictory to the realization of the identity [of ''Atman''] with the highest ''Atman''."{{sfn|Mayeda|1992|p=85, 220 (Up.II.1.30)}}