Sage Sankara varied his practical advice and doctrinal teaching according to the people he was amongst.+

Sage Sankara varied his practical advice and doctrinal teaching according to the people he was amongst. He never told them to give up their particular religion or beliefs or metaphysics completely; he only told them to give up the worst features of abuse. At the same time, he showed just one step forward toward the truth.

Sage Sankara says in Brahma Sutras: that Brahman is the cause of the world, whereas in Manduka upanishad he denies it.

Sage Gaudapada says: - the merciful Veda teaches karma and Upasana to people of lower and middling intellect, while jnana is taught to those of higher intellect.

Sage Sankara says in Brahma Sutras: that Brahman is the cause of the world, whereas in Mandukya he denies it.

Brahma Sutras, i.e. "Vedanta Sutras" by Badarayana, is intended for those of middling intellects, not for those who have the best brains: it is a semi-theological, semi-philosophical work; it starts with the assumption that Brahman exists.

The doctrine of causality taught in the Brahma Sutra is not the same as our highest Advaitic non-causality. It is only the beginning towards that; it says that you do not find in the effect what is not already present in the cause.

The Sutra-Bhashya of Sankara principally deals with the principle of superimposition, yet the pundits have not grasped its higher semantic value.

Brahma Sutras begin with the dogma of Brahman but who has seen Brahman? It is a mere empty word like 'x'. Hence it is called a book of religion, not philosophy. It is for beginners who have not yet unfolded discrimination, who believe in creation (i.e., causality), and who have to be raised as Anandagiri, the commentator himself writes.

The opening sentence is "All this is Brahman.” But nobody knows or has seen Brahman. If we say "All this is wood" and show a piece of wood, the words are understandable. Suppose you have never seen wood. Then what is the use of such a sentence? It becomes meaningless when the object indicated is seen by none. Hence, the Brahma Sutra opening is equivalent to "All this is X". Both have no meaning so long as they are not understood if we take them as the data to start from. It is for this reason that I say the book is intended for theological minds because it begins with dogma, although its reasoning is close. For it starts with something imagined.

The Brahma Sutras together with Sage Sankara's commentary thereon do not contain higher Vedanta. They are intended for duffers.

Sankara's commentary on Brahma Sutras is not on a philosophical basis, but on a religio-mystic one, with the appeal to Vedas as the final authority. In Brahma Sutra, Sage Sankara takes the position that there is another entity outside us, i.e., the wall really exists separately from the mind. This was because Sage Sankara explains in Manduka Upanishad that those who study the Sutras are religious minds and intellectual children, hence his popular viewpoint to assist them. These people are afraid to go deeper because it means being heroic enough to refuse to accept Sruti and God's authority, in case they mean punishment by God. But we say: Keep the scriptures for children but throw them on the fire for wise seekers.:~Santthosh Kumaar  

Sage Sankara Says:~ The religion is meant for ignorant people. Advaitic wisdom is meant for the serious truth seekers.+

The ‘I’ or ‘I AM’ is a physical prison.+

Self-realization is the direct realization of the ultimate truth or real god, in contrast with traditional paths, which are indirect. The other paths cannot lead to the ultimate destination because they are based on the false self, which they hold as real Self and false experience as reality.

Until and unless one overcomes physical shackle it is impossible to understand and assimilate the nondual truth, which is beyond the physical existence or the universe. Consciousness itself is lord of itself though not of the universe. And having nothing it has all.

Sage Gaudapada quotes from the Upanishads: "There's no plurality here"; "The Lord [Atman] through his powers appears to be many"; "those who are attached to creation or production or origination go to utter darkness"; "the unborn is never reborn, for who can produce him [Atman]?”

It is only those who base on ‘I’ or ‘I AM’ as the Self, argue and quarrel amongst themselves.

People who are fully aware that form, time, and space are merely an illusion created out of consciousness have no reason to quarrel because for them everything is consciousness and no second thing exist other than consciousness.

The one who discriminates between the Real and the unreal, whose focus of attention is turned away from the illusory physical existence, who possesses calmness, and who is longing for freedom from experiencing the illusion as reality, is alone considered qualified to take the path of reason.

Enumerated discrimination between the Real and the unreal yearning for freedom.

A firm conviction to the effect that the Soul, which is in the form of consciousness, is real and the mind, which is in the form of the universe, is unreal, is designated as discrimination between the Real and the unreal.

The ‘I’ or ‘I AM’ are mere words. The reality is beyond thoughts and words.

The words have meaning in duality. Duality exists until the mind exists. Mind exists where there is a division of form, time, and space.

If there is no division of form, time, and space, then there is no mind. Words are used as a tool to name individual objects and feelings within the duality.

The words become meaningless when one becomes aware of the formless substance of the mind, which is consciousness.

The Soul is the Self. From the standpoint of the Soul, the Self, the mind is merely an illusion.

If the mind is merely an illusion, then the form, time, and space are bound to be an illusion. If form, time, and space are an illusion, then the thoughts and words that rise within the scope of form, time, and space are bound to be an illusion.

Thus, body, ego, words, thoughts, and whatever the contents of the universe are created out of a single stuff that is consciousness.

It is necessary to know 'What is mind?' and 'What is the substance of the mind? ' and 'What is the source of the mind? ' to realize the words are meaningless in the realm of truth.

Deeper self-search reveals that the ‘I’ is not the Self. ‘I’ is in the form of mind. The mind is in the form of the universe.

The universe appears as waking or dream and disappears as deep sleep.

The formless substance and witness of the three states is the Soul, the Self, which is present in the form of invisible consciousness.

If the Self is form, then the evolution theory holds water. If the Self is formless, then all the theories based on form are of no value.

Until one thinks 'I' or I AM' as the Self, all these theories cannot transport anyone beyond form, time, and space.

The theory of evolution is based on individuality, whereas the Self pervades everything and everywhere in the universe.

Individuality is reality within the illusory universe. Thus, all the theory based on individuality is bound to be illusory.

Thus, our judgment, reason, and conclusion have to be based on the formless Self, not on the form as the Self to realize the truth hidden by the illusory universe.

Freedom is becoming free from experiencing the illusion or duality as reality by realizing the fact that the Self is not the form but the Self is formless. It is possible to realize this without realizing that the individual Self or ego is a reality within the false experience.

Thus, all the knowledge accumulated by judging on the base of the false self is false knowledge.

The ‘I’ or ‘I AM’ is a physical prison.

If ‘I’ is not the physical body, what is it?

Since the sense of ‘I’ is present only when the mind is present, it disappears along with the mind. The seeker will come to a conclusion after thoroughly verifying this fact through inquiry, analysis, and reasoning and then come to a firm conviction that ‘I’ is mind.

If ‘I’ is mind and mind is universe and universe appears as waking or dream are one and the same thing.

It is wrong to identify the Self as he or she because it refers to physicality.

The Self is genderless because it is formless. Identifying the Self as he or she, leads to all sorts of doubts and confusion. When the Self is identified as He or She, it becomes physical self or ego.

When the ego is not the self, it is erroneous to judge the truth on the base of the ego and come to some conclusion of finality on the physical base erroneous because the Advaitic truth is the prior appearance of the physical existence.

Thus, the truth has to be judged on the ultimate point of view, not on the base of what appeared later on.

Man has been conditioned to think and be and behave and believe and live as an individual separate from the world. Therefore, the Self has been identified with physical body with the name within the waking experience.

The ‘mind’ is the Waking or dream experience. The Waking or dream is not the experience of the physical body but of the Soul, the Self.

The man and his world are within the mind; therefore, the mind is not within the brain. This has to be understood to assimilate Self-knowledge. Without understanding this fact, assimilation is impossible.

The nature of the Self is formless and non-dual. The nature of the mind is duality or diversity.

The Self is the formless substance of the mind /duality /diversity. Therefore, the whole experience of diversity is created out of a single stuff.

There is no division in ultimate standpoint is the Self, which in the form of consciousness. Viewing the worldview on the base of the physical self is the cause of division and separation.

When the seeker becomes aware that the true Self is not physical but the Soul, the Self, he becomes aware of that the mind is mere illusion. The one who is ignorant of the true self experiences the duality as reality.

A person perceives the world within the mind. Absent of mind is absent of waking or dream. Thus, waking or dream is the mind.

One thinks he is an individual separate from the world within the mind. He is unaware of the fact that the mind is not within his brain, but he and his experience of the world are within the mind.

Thus, he thinks he is born in this world and world existed prior to him. Thus, this conviction makes him believe the birth, life and death as reality.

Until this conviction is there, one will view and judge the worldview on the physical base, which is the cause of ignorance that the true Self is the Soul.

This ignorance of the true self is the main hurdle in the pursuit of truth. Therefore, it is very much necessary to rectify the seeking base from physical [form] to spirit [formless] before proceeding further in pursuit of truth.

If the seeking base is not rectified it will lead one towards hallucination. When the mind itself is myth then the man and his experience of the world is bound to be myth. Therefore perfect understanding of the mind will help one to unfold the mystery of the mind.

It is impossible to unfold the truth on the base of a false self within the false experience because the truth is prior to the appearance of the falsehood. And falsehood creates ignorance.

The seeker has to burn down ignorance by rectifying the base of reasoning by realizing that the Self is not physical but is the formless consciousness.

The ‘I’ or ‘I AM’, which represent individuality, is the cause of ignorance. Thus, one has to get rid of ignorance by overcoming the intoxication of ‘I’ or I AM.

That is why Sage Sankara says in Viveka Chudamani:- 61. For one who has been bitten by the serpent of Ignorance, the only remedy is the knowledge of Brahman. Of what avail are the Vedas and (other) Scriptures, Mantras (sacred formulae), and medicines to such a one?

62. A disease does not leave off if one simply utters the name of the medicine, without taking it; (similarly) without direct realization, one cannot be liberated by the mere utterance of the word Brahman.

63. Without causing the objective universe to vanish and without knowing the truth of the Self, how is one to achieve Liberation by the mere utterance of the word Brahman? — It would result merely in an effort of speech.

64. Without killing one’s enemies and possessing oneself with the splendor of the entire surrounding region, one cannot claim to be an emperor by merely saying, ‘I am an emperor.

65. As a treasure hidden underground requires (for its extraction) competent instruction, excavation, the removal of stones and other such things lying above it and (finally) grasping, but never comes out by being (merely) called out by name, so the transparent Truth of the self, which is hidden by Maya and its effects, is to be attained through the instructions of a knower of Brahman.

People who are yearning for spiritual truth will not find it through intellectual speculation and assumption. Intellectual truth is individual truth. And Religious truth is individual truth, and it is not universal truth because the religion is based on individuality. :~Santthosh Kumaar

The deep inquiry into the nature of the ‘I’ ’ and free the Soul from the illusory bondage of the ‘I’.+

Who am I?- this question was boldly taken up by the great Advaitic Sage Sankara who wrote commentaries on some of the spiritual treatises known as the Upanishads, which form the latter part of the Vedas, the Holy Scriptures. Sage Sankara addressed to the scholars, philosophers, and monks of his day.

The deep inquiry into the nature of the ‘I’ ’ and free the Soul from the illusory bondage of the ‘I’. The ‘Who am ‘I’- inquiry is for the beginners to expose the unreal nature of the ‘I’.

Who am I -inquiry has no dynamic, direct, universal appeal because it is based on the individual within the illusory world.

Sage Sankara: ~ VC-63- "Without knowing and examining the universe, one can’t know the Truth, as the idea that the external world exists won't go. It can go only by an inquiry into the nature of the external world.

If the inquiry does not include the universe, then it is incomplete.

The experience of birth, life, death, and the world are happening within the ‘I. The ‘I’ is extraneous to the Self. Remember the Self is not the ‘I’ but the ‘Self’ is the Soul the witness of the ‘I.

Until you hold the ‘Self ‘as the ‘I’ you will never be able to get Self-realization. ‘I’ hides the Soul, which is the Self.

'I’ is ignorance.

‘I’ is the duality.

‘I’ is the form, time and space.

‘I’ is the universe.

‘I’ is the waking.

‘I’ is the dream.

‘I’ is the illusion.

‘I’ is the experience of birth, life, death, and the world.

But remember:~

Without the ‘I’, there is no ignorance.

Without the ‘I’, there is no duality.

Without the ‘I’, there is no form, time and space.

Without the ‘I’, there is no universe.

Without the ‘I’, there is no waking.

Without the ‘I’, there is no dream.

Without the ‘I’, there is no illusion.

Without the ‘I’, there is no experience of birth, life, death

and the world.

The ‘I’ hides the truth of the whole. The ‘I’ hides the truth.

That is why Ashtavakra Gita 16:10:~ ‘If you desire liberation, but you still say ‘I', If you feel the ‘Self’ is the ‘I’, you are not a wise man or a seeker. You are simply a man who suffers.

Bhagavad Gita: ~ ‘The permanent is always there, only the transient ‘I’ comes and goes. (2.18)

It is time to discard the ‘I’. Never use the word the ‘I’ or I AM for the Self.

The Soul is not within your body, but the Soul pervades the whole world in which you exist.

Those gurus who think the ‘Self’ is within the body propagated the Self is to be ‘I AM and they also propagate consciousness is limited to the physical body. They think the consciousness is not permanent because it disappears along with physical death.

When the Self is not the body but the Soul, which is birthless and deathless, how can you relate the ‘’Self’ to the Soul, which is ever formless, timeless and spaceless existence.

The ‘I-centric’ teachings are mere imagination based on the dualistic perspective, whereas the truth is based on the nondualistic perspective. : ~ Santthosh Kumaar

 

Sage Sankara was Brahma Gnani of universal order.+

Wheter Sage Sankara was a Jagadguru or a Brahma Gnani.

Sage Sankara’s wisdom has nothing to do with orthodox belief systems. Sage Sankara is the only sage who has final authority on the Advaitic truth. The Advaitic truth is rational truth and scientific truth without dogma.

Sage Sankara’s wisdom has nothing to do with the orthodox belief systems. Some philosophers in the past dissented from this interpretation of the Vedanta philosophy, holding that the incarnated Souls were separate from the Divine Essence and only finally merged with it after the cycles of birth.

All these theoretical philosophies are based on the imagination based on the false ‘Self’ (ego or you) within the false experience (waking).

Orthodox people argue that Sage Sankara had a Guru. Sage Sankara himself was a Guru.

Yes, for orthodox people, he was JagadGuru, but for seekers of truth, he was a Brahma Gnani of universal order. Traditionally, religious people are so entangled in orthodox religiosity that it is very difficult for them to free themselves from narrow-minded prejudices, dogmas, and superstitions.

These educated orthodox people are more ignorant than the illiterate. They strongly stuck to their inherited orthodox baggage meant for the ignorant populace.

Even though their own sage has said that orthodoxy is meant for the ignorant populace, they ignore it, and they are like the blind led by another blind, follow the inherited blind belief.

Even swami Vivekananda was Ramakrishna Paramahansa's disciple. Swami Vivekananda himself said: ~ “You have to grow from the inside out. None can teach you, and none can make you spiritual. There is no other teacher but your own Soul.”

There are two kinds of audiences - the ordinary ones who desire the transitory heaven and other pleasures obtained as a result of ritual sacrifices, and the most advanced seeker who seeks to know the ultimate truth or Brahman.

The Guru and Guru paramparas are meant for the first audience, to help lead its followers along the way. However, there is no need to follow any parampara and follow any Guru those who wish to realize the truth which is beyond the form, time, and space.

We should not mix religion with spirituality because religion is based on the ego and spirituality is based on the Soul.

Religion is concerned with its paramparas, not truth, whereas Spirituality is concerned only with the truth, which is beyond form, time, and space. Religion is not Spirituality.

Sage Sankara: ~ "Though I wear these robes of a Sanyasin, it is only for the sake of bread" (Select Works of Sage Sankara, also his commentary on Brihad)

Thus, the above passage proves that all those who are wearing the sanyasin robes are wearing it for the sake of bread that belongs to the religion; they have nothing to do with the Self-knowledge or Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana. There is no need to criticize and condemn the Gurus, yogis, and swamis because they are needed for the welfare of ignorant masses in the dualistic world.

So he wore a Guru's robe only for the sake of the ignorant. So he was identified as Guru with parampara by religious people. For the truth seekers, Sage Sankara is a Brahma Gnani.

Sage Sankara clearly indicates in Viveka Chudamani (2) that the Knower of the Atman (A Gnani) "bears no outward mark of a holy man" (Stanza 539).

When Sage Sankara says, the Knower of the Atman (A Gnani) "bears no outward mark of a holy man.

Thus, it proves that the religious Gurus and yogis are not Gnanis because they identified themselves as holy people.

On the Advaitic perspective, A Gnani never identifies himself as a Guru or a Yogi or someone's disciple. The one who accepts himself as a Guru or someone’s disciple is not a Gnani.

The seekers of truth need not identify Sage Sankara as a holy man or JagadGuru but as a Brahma Gnani.

Ashtavakra Samhita: ~ "The man of knowledge (Gnani), though living like an ordinary man, is contrary to him and only those like him understand his state.

All the Guru Parampara is for the religious people. There is no need for a Guru who wants to tread the path of wisdom.

The Guru is useless so long as the ultimate truth is unknown, and the Guru is equally useless when the ultimate truth or Brahman has already been known.

A Guru is needed in religious and the yogic path. There is no need for a Guru to acquire Self-knowledge or Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana.: ~ Santthosh Kumaar

Ish Upanishads says:- The time you spend there is wasted because if you were not there, you could have spent that time moving forward towards Self-knowledge, which is your goal.+

Ish Upanishad:~ Those people who have neglected the attainment of Self-knowledge and have thus committed suicide.

Ish Upanishads says:- Vidya and Avidya both are hindrances to Self-knowledge, but Vidya is even worse than Avidya. The word Vidya is used here in a special sense; here, it means worshipping gods and goddesses. By worshipping gods and goddesses, you will go after death to the world of gods and goddesses. But will that help you? The time you spend there is wasted because if you were not there, you could have spent that time moving forward towards Self-knowledge, which is your goal. In the world of gods and goddesses, you cannot do that, and thus you go deeper and deeper into darkness.

Avidya is Karma and, therefore, a hindrance. You perform Avidya - i.e., you perform Agnihotra and other sacrifices. This is a roundabout way of purifying the mind, and it is also groping in the dark. But it may not have as heavy a toll on your time and energy as the other.

Therefore, self-realization is necessary in order to realize the ultimate truth or god. Self-realization is real God realization.

People are ignorant, and they are unaware of the reality of their true existence. Man and his experience of the universe are simply a mirage created out of consciousness. Consciousness is the real Self, the real Atman, is the reality.

That is why in Mundaka Upanishad indicates: - The rituals and the sacrifices described in the Vedas deal with lower knowledge. The sages ignored these rituals and went in search of higher knowledge. ... Such rituals are unsafe rafts for crossing The sea of samsara, of birth and death. Doomed to shipwreck are those who try to cross the sea of samsara on these poor rafts. Ignorant of their own ignorance, yet wise In their own esteem, these deluded men Proud of their vain learning, go round and round Like the blind led by the blind.

Scriptural knowledge is conceptual divisions invented by philosophers by their excessive analysis. all these concepts are never-ending. They create more confusion. Fortunate is the one who does not lose himself in the labyrinths of philosophy but goes straight to the source from which the universe rises and subsides.

The direct path to the truth is the source from which the 'I' arises. Thus, the source is the Soul, the Self. The Soul or Atman is the real Self.

Ataman itself is Brahman. Thus, it is necessary to view the worldview on the base of the Atman, which is the true Self,

and formless substance and witness of the experience of diversity. Thus, with deeper inquiry, analysis, and reasoning on the true base, one can acquire self–knowledge in lesser time and effort.

The unity in diversity is possible only through Self-knowledge, not by mastering the scriptural knowledge.

One has to bifurcate the physicalized Adavaita [religious add-ons], which is meant for the mass mindset, who are incapable of verifying their inherited beliefs. But for the seekers of truth, to get the pure essence of non-duality, which is based on the invisible Soul.

The path of inquiry, analysis, and reasoning on the true base leads one towards the non-dual destination. There is a need to rectify the seeking base from ego base to soul base to understand, assimilate and realize the nondual truth. This self–inquiry is not the critical study of the scriptures.

Katha Upanishad:~ This Ataman cannot be attained by the study of the Vedas, or by intelligence, or by much hearing of sacred books. It is attained by him alone whom It chooses. To such a one, Ataman reveals its own form. (Katha Upanishad Ch-II -23-P-20)

Mundaka Upanishad:- This Ataman cannot be attained through study of the Vedas, nor through intelligence, nor through much learning. He who chooses Ataman—by him alone is Ataman attained. It is Ataman that reveals to the seeker its true nature. [ 3 –page-70]

The scriptures indicate that Ataman is Brahman, and Brahman is the ultimate truth. Therefore the Soul, which is in the form of consciousness, is ultimate truth.

Remember:~

Self-Realization is the direct realization of the ultimate truth or real god, in contrast with traditional paths, which are indirect. And the other paths cannot lead to the ultimate destination because they are based on the false self, which they hold as real self and false experience as reality.

Until and unless one overcomes physical shackle it is impossible to understand and assimilate the nondual truth, which is beyond the physical existence or the universe. Consciousness itself is lord of itself though not of the universe. And having nothing it has all.

Sage Gaudapada quotes from the Upanishads: "There's no plurality here"; "The Lord [Atman] through his powers appears to be many"; "those who are attached to creation or production or origination go to utter darkness"; "the unborn is never reborn, for who can produce him [Atman]?”

The one who discriminates between the Real and the unreal, whose focus of attention is turned away from the illusory physical existence, who possesses calmness, and who is longing for freedom from experiencing the illusion as reality, is alone considered qualified to take the path of reason.

Enumerated discrimination between the Real and the unreal yearning for freedom. A firm conviction to the effect that the Soul, which is in the form of consciousness, is real and the mind, which is in the form of the universe, is unreal, is designated as discrimination between the Real and the unreal. :~Santthosh Kumaar

Upanishad itself says: sarvam khalvidam brahma - All this (universe) is verily Brahman.+

Preaching and teaching is not wisdom, but by very careful reasoning, the seeker has to determine the nature of reality. Thinking in right direction alone helps seekers determine the nature of reality.

The sugar cannot know itself its sweetness. The true self without ignorance is without the experience of duality or illusion. Thus, one has to base on the sugar not on its sweetness. Without the sugar, there is no sweetness. Similarly, without consciousness, the three states cease to exist as reality.

Seeker of truth is in the in the quest of the knowledge of ever being conscious of eternality of one Self, and understanding, assimilating and realizing it inextricably linked to the what constitute bondage and liberation.

Non-attachment for the three states is freedom or liberation from experiencing the illusory birth, life, death, and world as reality. Love for practical life within the practical world is bondage.

By deeper thinking and realizing the self is not the form but self is formless consciousness and mentally shifting the attention from the objectified subject to the formless subject, which is consciousness the inner most self.

By realizing the invisible consciousness is the ultimate truthf, one realizes consciousness alone exists; the three states are merely an illusion created out of consciousness. Thus, the three states are unreal created out of consciousness, which alone is real.

The one who discriminates between the Real and the unreal, whose focus of attention is turned away from the illusory physical existence, who possesses calmness, and who is longing for freedom from experiencing the illusion as reality, is alone considered qualified to take the path of reason.

People who are yearning for spiritual truth will not find it through intellectual speculation and assumption. Intellectual truth is individual truth. Love implies duality, and love is individual feelings within the falsehood.

Love is necessary and valuable in the state of ignorance but it is not the means to acquire wisdom. Love is a religious tool to lead life in practical world. And Religious truth is individual truth and it is not universal truth because the religion is based on individuality.

It becomes difficult for the orthodox cult to accept anything else as truth other than their accepted belief, which they hold as truth. Although all religious followers are participants alike in the spiritual endeavour of the world, overzealous followers of each religion are not prepared to accord equal status to other faiths and assert the superiority of their own.

Thus, universal brotherhood is a total impossibility because it is difficult to accept anything other than their inherited belief system.

Most of the pundits are egoic and they try to snub others who question them. They think they are unquestionable authority. They quote the citation from the scriptuers as proof without verifying the validity. All punditry is a great obstacle in realizing the Advaitic truth expounded by the Sage Sankara and Sage Goudapada.

One finds lots of differences between Adavita preaching and practice. There is need to bifurcate religion, concept of god and scriptures from Adavitic philosophy to assimilate the essence of Adavita.

Sage Sankara says in Brahma Sutras: that Brahman is the cause of the world, whereas in Manduka Upanishad he denies it. This is because he says that at the lower stage of understanding, the former teaching must be given, for people will get frightened as they cannot understand how the world can be without a cause, but to those in a higher stage, the truth of non-causality can be revealed.

Sage Sankara himself has warned us not to use ambiguous words and to practice semantic analysis in his book "Definition of one's own Self. [" Page 199, v.24 of "Sankara's Selected Works]

Sage Sankara founded his Advaita Vedanta either on reason independent of sruti or on sruti confirmed by reason." Sage Sankara's commentary on the Manduka Upanishad, II, 1: This [the unreality of duality] is borne out by the Srutis ... But it is possible also to show the unreality of the object world even from pure reasoning, and this second chapter is undertaken for that purpose.

Sage Sankara himself had often said that his philosophy was based on Sruti, or revealed scripture. This may be because Sage Sankara addressed the ordinary man, who finds security in the idea of causality and thus in the idea of God—and Revelation is indispensable to prove the latter. He believed that those of superior intelligence have no need of this idea of divine causality and can therefore dispense with Sruti and arrive at the truth of Non-Dualism by pure reason.

Nonduality does not need the support of any Scripture or Revelation like the Veda. For it is based not upon the varying theological fancies, which are as numerous as the sands of the sea, but upon reason, the common heritage of all mankind, irrespective of colour or creed or clime.

When Upanishad itself says: sarvam khalvidam brahma - All this (universe) is verily Brahman. By following back all of the relative appearances in the world, we eventually return to that from which it is all manifest – the non-dual reality [ Chandogya Upanishad].

Then it is no use going roundabout way, trace the Brahman which is the formless substance and witness of the universe, which is in the form of mind. By tracing the source of the mind or universe one will be able to realize the Brahman.

Thus, self-knowledge is meant only for those who have an intense urge and courage to accept the truth with humility and reject the untruth. Since people start comparing with their scriptural knowledge, it becomes impossible to assimilate and realize the non-dual truth. Therefore, there is no need to convince anyone other than our own selves to get the firm conviction.

Sage Gaudapada says:- the merciful Veda teaches karma and upaasana to people of lower and middling intellect, while jnana is taught to those of higher intellect.

So they clearly indicate rituals and theories are not meant for those who are searching for higher knowledge or wisdom.

All the orthodox Advaitins indulge and immerse themselves in a ritualistic-oriented lifestyle and preach theoretical philosophies, which are obstacles in realizing the Advaitic truth. Many chose these orthodox scholars as their gurus. But these gurus are good to learn the conceptual Advaita meant for those orthodox who believe their conduct-oriented lifestyle leads to liberation. But those who are seeking truth have to do their own homework to acquire Self-knowledge. :~ Santthosh Kumaar