Advaita Vedanta

=====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}}