You Are That, All Right, We Just Need to Figure Out What
September 17, 2026 DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780197861493.003.0007 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper |
|---|---|
| Key points | Argues that Śaṅkara distinguishes Upaniṣadic texts of knowledge (para-vidyā), which negate ignorance by presenting Brahman as non-dual and attribute-free, from texts of meditation (apara-vidyā), which affirm duality through injunctions to meditate. Identity statements such as tat tvam asi are central to Śaṅkara's soteriology, and Brahman's characteristics—Being, Consciousness, Bliss—function as definitional markers rather than descriptive predicates. The chapter contends that Śaṅkara resolves the linguistic and epistemological difficulty of conveying a non-relational reality through the principles of co-referentiality and compositionality. |
Abstract
Abstract This chapter examines Śaṅkara’s Upaniṣadic hermeneutics, focusing on the distinction between texts of knowledge (para-vidyā) and texts of meditation (apara-vidyā). It argues that while all Upaniṣadic passages operate within the framework of ignorance, only some intend to negate it by presenting Brahman as non-dual and devoid of attributes, whereas others affirm duality through injunctions of meditation. The discussion situates identity statements such as tat tvam asi at the center of Śaṅkara’s soteriology, contrasting them with passages that describe Brahman as qualified by adjuncts. Through detailed analysis of definitional and negational procedures, the chapter explores how Śaṅkara interprets Brahman’s characteristics—Being, Consciousness, Bliss—not as descriptive predicates but as definitional markers. It further addresses the linguistic and epistemological challenges in conveying a non-relational reality, highlighting Śaṅkara’s solution through the principles of co-referentiality and compositionality.