---
type: Concept
bundle: upanishadic-core
bundle_version: "0.6.0"
id: laksana-brahman
title: "Lakṣaṇa (Brahman)"
iast: "Lakṣaṇa"
devanagari: "लक्षण"
description: "Indicator / pointer — the Vedāntic distinction between Svarūpa Lakṣaṇa (own-nature indicator, pointing to Brahman's essential nature) and Taṭastha Lakṣaṇa (accidental indicator, pointing to Brahman through a contingent relation like being the cause of the world); not Aristotelian essential vs. accidental properties; the distinction governs how the Mahāvākyas are to be interpreted"
darshana:
  - Advaita Vedānta
  - Vedānta
school_scope: "Technical term of Vedāntic epistemology; appears in Śaṅkara's Brahmasūtra Bhāṣya and in the Pañcadaśī; governs the correct interpretation of the Upaniṣadic descriptions of Brahman"
text_source: "Brahmasūtra Bhāṣya 1.1.1–4 (Śaṅkarācārya); Pañcadaśī 1.6–8 (Vidyāraṇya)"
tags: [laksana, svarupa-laksana, tathastha-laksana, brahman, definition, advaita, mahavakya]
not:
  - term: "Aristotelian essential vs. accidental properties"
    why: "Aristotle's distinction between essential properties (without which a thing cannot be what it is) and accidental properties (which a thing can lose while remaining itself) is a distinction within ontology — both types are real properties of real substances. Vedānta's Svarūpa/Taṭastha distinction is not about which properties are more central to Brahman. Taṭastha Lakṣaṇa does not describe a real property of Brahman at all — it is a pedagogical pointer that uses a contingent relation to direct the student toward Brahman, which then must be approached via Svarūpa Lakṣaṇa."
    instead: "Read Lakṣaṇa as 'pointer' or 'indicator' — a linguistic instrument whose purpose is to direct cognition toward Brahman; Svarūpa Lakṣaṇa is accurate; Taṭastha Lakṣaṇa is useful but provisional"
  - term: "a property or definition of Brahman"
    why: "Brahman cannot be defined in the standard logical sense (genus + differentia) because there is no genus that includes Brahman and no differentia that distinguishes Brahman from members of the same genus. Brahman is the only member of its kind. Lakṣaṇa serves as an indicator — it directs inquiry toward Brahman — but it does not constitute a logical definition."
  - term: "a name or description applicable to Brahman as an object"
    why: "A name or description implies the speaker is outside the named object, describing it from a third-person position. The Mahāvākyas (which the Svarūpa Lakṣaṇa governs) use first-person pointing: 'I am Brahman,' 'That art thou.' The Svarūpa Lakṣaṇa is the instrument by which the student recognizes their own nature — not a third-person description of an external object."
related:
  - /concepts/sat-chit-ananda.md
  - /concepts/nirguna-brahman.md
  - /concepts/saguna-brahman.md
  - /concepts/mahavakya.md
  - /concepts/tat-tvam-asi.md
timestamp: "2026-07-01"
okf_version: "0.2"
license: "CC BY-SA 4.0"
---

# Lakṣaṇa (Brahman) — लक्षण

**Not:** Aristotelian essential/accidental, a property of Brahman, third-person description

## Etymology

Lakṣaṇa (लक्षण) from lakṣ (to mark, to indicate, to recognize) + suffix *-ana* (instrument). Lakṣaṇa = that by which something is indicated or recognized; a mark, a pointer, an indicator. In general Sanskrit grammar and epistemology, a Lakṣaṇa is the definition or distinguishing mark of a term. In Vedāntic epistemology, it is the indicator that directs cognition toward Brahman.

## The Two Types

### Taṭastha Lakṣaṇa (तटस्थ लक्षण) — Accidental Indicator

Taṭastha = standing on the bank (from taṭa, bank of a river + stha, standing). A Taṭastha Lakṣaṇa is an indicator that describes something by a relation it has to something else — a contingent characteristic used for identification, not a description of the thing's own nature.

Example: "The cause of the universe" as a pointer to Brahman. This relation — cause-of-universe — is not Brahman's own nature; it names Brahman in relation to the universe. The universe is Vyāvahārika (conventional reality); the cause-relation belongs to that domain. Once the student is directed toward Brahman, this pointer must be abandoned — Brahman is not essentially or permanently the cause-of-the-universe (for on the Pāramārthika level, there is no universe distinct from Brahman to be caused).

Use: Taṭastha Lakṣaṇa is used for the initial identification of the topic — pointing the student toward Brahman from within the conventional framework they already understand.

### Svarūpa Lakṣaṇa (स्वरूप लक्षण) — Own-Nature Indicator

Svarūpa = own form, own nature (sva = own + rūpa = form). A Svarūpa Lakṣaṇa indicates what a thing IS in itself, not its contingent relations.

The primary Svarūpa Lakṣaṇa of Brahman in the Taittirīya (2.1) is: *satyam jñānam anantam brahma* — "Brahman is being, consciousness, infinite." This is not a description of Brahman from the outside but an indicator of Brahman's own nature that allows recognition from within: "I am being; I am consciousness; I am limitless." The Svarūpa Lakṣaṇa is what the Mahāvākyas point to — it functions as the instrument of self-recognition (Ātma-jñāna).

Sat-Cit-Ānanda is the compact Svarūpa Lakṣaṇa form: being, consciousness, bliss — not three properties but three angles on the same self-recognizing nature.

## Why the Distinction Matters for Mahāvākya Interpretation

The Mahāvākyas — "Aham Brahmāsmi," "Tat Tvam Asi" — require the student to identify the Jīva's Ātman with Brahman. This identification cannot proceed via Taṭastha Lakṣaṇa: the Jīva is not "the cause of the universe," and identifying with that would be conceptually confused.

The identification proceeds via Svarūpa Lakṣaṇa: "I am Sat (pure being — not this particular existence but existence-as-such); I am Cit (pure consciousness — not this particular knowing-mind but consciousness-as-such); I am Ānanda (intrinsically complete — not dependent on any object for fullness)." The Svarūpa Lakṣaṇa enables the Mahāvākya to function as a pramāṇa — an instrument of valid cognition — because the Svarūpa of Brahman and the Svarūpa of Ātman are non-different.

## The River-Bank Metaphor for Taṭastha

The image implicit in "Taṭastha" (bank-standing): imagine standing on the bank of a river and pointing to a bird flying past — "that bird, the one now crossing the sun." The relation "now-crossing-the-sun" is not the bird's nature; it is a contingent pointer used in that moment to indicate the bird. Similarly, "the cause of the universe" stands on the bank of conventional knowing and points toward Brahman without constituting Brahman's nature.

## Audience Metaphor

A teacher says: "The brilliant student in this room — the one who has already scored highest on three exams." That description points to a particular person. But once you've turned and recognized who it is, the description falls away — it doesn't tell you who that person IS, only which person among many to look at. A better description would be: "the one who understands the problem directly, without needing formulae to be prompted." The first description (Taṭastha) gets your attention. The second (Svarūpa) begins to tell you what the person IS. Sat-Cit-Ānanda is the Svarūpa Lakṣaṇa: not Brahman pointed out from a distance, but Brahman's own nature recognized from within.

## Citations

1. Brahmasūtra Bhāṣya 1.1.1–4 (Śaṅkarācārya) — definition of Brahman and the role of Lakṣaṇa; see [references/brahmasutra-bhashya.md]
2. Taittirīya Upaniṣad 2.1 — satyam jñānam anantam brahma as Svarūpa Lakṣaṇa; see [references/taittiriya-upanishad.md]
3. Pañcadaśī 1.6–8 (Vidyāraṇya) — Taṭastha vs. Svarūpa Lakṣaṇa of consciousness; see [references/panchadashi.md]
4. Upadesasāhasrī 17.1–5 (Śaṅkarācārya) — Svarūpa Lakṣaṇa as the instrument of Ātma-jñāna; see [references/upadesasahasri.md]
