Discussion on Śrotavya, Mantavya and Nididhyasitavya in the Early Vedanta

Abstract

This paper presents and compares different interpretations of the passage from Br . hadāran . yakopanis . ad 2.4.5/4.5.6, according to which one should hear about the Self, reflect, and meditate on it. In his commentary, Śaṅkara cites the view, in sub-commentaries attributed to Bhartr . prapañca, according to which this cognitive process is divided into three parts. Furthermore, different parts of the Upanis . ad are responsible for each stage of the process. According to this view, the third part, which states that one should meditate on the Self, is a vidhi, i.e. an injunction for mental action that leads to knowledge. This paper shows why this is unacceptable for Śaṅkara and his followers, why the cognitive process can neither be separated nor enjoined. The paper shows that this discussion in Advaita Vedānta is primarily hermeneutical because in fact, in the background, it is a discussion of the hierarchy of importance of the texts of the Vedic canon; the Upanis . ad must be a valid means of cognition, and thus more important than Brāhman . as, which contain injunctions for action.