When one goes deeper research in the annals of history then he becomes aware of the fact that: Sri, Sankara started the revival process of Sanatan Dharma/Vedic Religion, when he saw people turning towards other religions like Christianity and Islam which came to India after the death of the Christ and also after St. Thomas came to India which is obviously in A.D. and we are in A.D.2010. Therefore, the Advaith Math and Advaith philosophy came into existence in and around 8th century A.D.
Sri,Sankara is regarded as the greatest sage in India's history because he sought to unify the country by placing his institutions and teaching from every corner of the Indian continent , impressing oneness as a nation on all the people. This oneness is not to be restricted to religion for it includes its practical application to life such as politics and sociology; and he accepted and encouraged all the prevailing religions but merely purified them of their immoralities. It is false to say he attacked or persecuted Buddhism. This was an interpretation by pundit-followers who came afterwards and never understood his message. He has never said that a certain caste or community or that Sanyas only could attain Brahman; he always taught universality.
Sri, Sankara was not combating Buddhism and Jainism. The entire subcontinent was at that time almost fully Buddhist. Sri, Sankara walked the length and breadth of the country and revived Sanatan Dharma in a new form by introducing Adavita on the base of Vedas and Brahma sutras to suit the mass mind set of that time.
As one goes in deeper research one finds the fact that, the Adavitic philosophy is extension of Buddhism. The Adavita came into existence by Sri, Sankara in 8th century and Dwaita by Madvacharya in 12th century. And qualified Adavita came after 12th century; it means they were not in existence prior to 8TH century.
The new form of Sanatan Dharma which consists of Advitha, Dwitha and Vishita -Advitha all are based on Vedas are called present day Hinduism. The Sanatan Dharma or Vedic religion prior to Sri,Sankara was different. Most of the rituals and ideas are adopted from Buddhism, Jainism and Abrahamic religion to suit the mindset of those days.
As one goes deeply in annals of history he finds: Beef eating Brahmins. All yagnas required beef and cow sacrifice. It was the Jainist influence that made most of vegetarian, especially the Brahmins.
Whatever came into existence after Sri, Sankara is a new religion based on Vedas not old Sanatan Dharma, which was rejected by Buddha. Thus the present day Hinduism is mixer of all ideologies of different sages of different regions accepted by people of India.
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.
Sri, Sankara says in Brahma Sutras: that Brahman is the cause of the world, whereas in Mandukya 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.
Sri, 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]
Buddha found religion in such a worthless state, with so many vile animal sacrifices, that he attacked religion. Sri, Sankara did not seek to destroy religion like Buddha but he advocated reforming it for better. He did this because he saw that the masses had to have some form of religion as they were not ripe intellectually for truth.
Sankara's sex experience in Benares and occupying the body of another man and then having sex intercourse with his wife, is a story created by pundits hiding the real fact. Sri, Sankara had the scientific spirit and when told by Saraswathi the woman that he was talking freely about sex, being a Sanyasi, he wanted to know the truth by having actual intercourse himself and thus learning by experiment and observation. Thus, this has to be viewed by the seeker on the rational standpoint, because the sex is part of the illusion on the ultimate standpoint. Sri, Sankara stressed the great importance of freeing our use of words from all ambiguity.
Buddhists and Jains did not believe in the Vedic positions, did not accept the scriptures. Hence, Sri, Sankara had to meet their objections also. Biographical anecdotes about his persecution of Jains and Buddhists or of his challenges to self-immolation for the loser of a debate are all foolish tales fabricated after his lifetime either by his own followers who took him to be a religious propagator but not as a philosopher or by the dualistic cult.
The religious pundiths of Adavitic sect relate boastfully pseudo-historic stories of how Sri, Sankara's school put down, persecuted end exterminated the Buddhists, as though this was something to be proud of. However these stories are either exaggerations or false stories fabricated by pundits or priest craft. The religious pundits are mere followers of religion, never having understood the depth of Advitic philosophy. Sri, Sankara gave religion and scholasticism and yoga no less than philosophy, to the world.
His commentary on Mandukya is pure philosophy, but many of his other books are presented from a religious standpoint to help those who cannot rise up to philosophy. North India is the home of mysticism and deification and South India of keen rational truth.
Sri, Sankara had only four fully trained disciples, although he advised some kings. His doctrines spread after his lifetime. His books were dictated to secretaries as he travelled. So, only few were capable of understanding his philosophy.
Sri, Sankara always travelled and he never lived in a monastery. He simply instructed his disciples to build one here and there " and then left because he was busy spreading his doctrines.
Some who followed Sri, Sankara are mere followers of religion, never having understood the Advaitic philosophy are religious scholars not Gnanis, and they are unable to grasp the non-dual -truth.
Sri, Sankara says seeker must first know what is before him. If he cannot know that, what else can he know or understand? If he gives up the external world in his inquiry, he cannot get the whole truth.
Some thinkers hold views of Maya which are entirely incorrect and untenable. They do not know Sankara's Upanishad Bashyas, but only the Brahma Sutra Bashya. The followers of Sri Sankara have constituted a religious sect. Thus all movements ultimately degenerate.
In commentary to "Brahma Sutras Sri, Sankara writes." "The highest beatitude is not to be attained by Yoga." [Sacred Books of East Series page 298 Vol.1.] And he also says Samadhi is the same as sleep [p.312]. ---this indicates that yoga is not the means to self realization. And yogic Samadhi is not non dual wisdom
Sri, Sankara's commentary to Brahma Sutras [Chap.3.4.50] shows that the Gnani "should pass through life", not run away from life and should take a middle course between seeking worldly honor and worldly abasement.
Sri, Sankara varied his practical advice and doctrinal teaching according to the people he was amongst. He never advised 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 towards the truth. Sri, Sankara was extremely precise and careful in his choice of words.
Sri, Sankara did more than write books or initiate Sanyasins: He brought India into a unity as a nation. He advised the mass: Worship what they wish, remain in their particular religion, but remember also they are part of a larger whole.
Few Pundits have caught the spirit; they are merely fond of his words. Sri, Sankara’s spirit is that of an appeal to reason, with scripture dragged in as a second and lesser support afterwards.
Sri, Sankara' gave religious, ritual or dogmatic instruction to the mass but pure philosophy only to the few who could rise to it. Hence the interpretation of his writings by commentators is often confusing because they mix up the two viewpoints. Thus they may assert that ritual is a means of realizing Brahman, which is absurd.
Centuries have passed since Sri, Sankara appeared; yet it is very hard to find his true teachings understood anywhere in the world today. It is because so few could rise to his level. Hence dualistic cults and devotional sects came in existence prospered.
It may not have been possible for him to have written so many books during such a short term of existence of 32 years. The truth is that he wrote very few books. Those actually written by him were Commentaries on Brahma Sutras and the Upanishads and on the Gita. All other books ascribed to him were not written down by his own hand. They are merely collections of notes recorded by his disciples from his sayings, talk and discussions.
Sri, Sankara wrote his commentaries on Mandukya commentary first, and then as this revealed that he thoroughly understood the subject, his gurus requested him to write the commentary on Badarayana's Brahma Sutras, which was a popular theological work universally studied by Advaitins. That is why his commentary is written from a lower dualistic point, for those who cannot rise higher, save that here and there Sri, Sankara occasionally has strewn a few truly Advaitic sentences.
Since, the Hinduism is mixer of many ideologies one gets confused which is true philosophy, because the dual, non-dual and qualified non-dual philosophies are based on Vedas. And many believe their inherited beliefs of their forefathers are pure and sacred without verifying the facts. All rituals and individualized gods are added time to time. Only when one tries to go deeper in alls of history one will be able to find that all the present days’ beliefs and rituals are not part of the Santana Dharma /Vedic religion.
Yajurved says:
Translation 1.
They enter darkness, those who worship natural things (for example air, water, sun, moon, animals, fire, stone, etc).
They sink deeper in darkness those who worship sambhuti. (Sambhuti means created things, for example table, chair, idol etc.)
[Yajurved 40:9]
Translation 2.
"Deep into shade of blinding gloom fall asambhuti's worshippers. They sink to darkness deeper yet who on sambhuti are intent."
[Yajurveda Samhita by Ralph T. H. Giffith pg 538]
Translation 3.
"They are enveloped in darkness, in other words, are steeped in ignorance and sunk in the greatest depths of misery who worship the uncreated, eternal prakrti -- the material cause of the world -- in place of the All-pervading God, But those who worship visible things born of the prakrti, such as the earth, trees, bodies (human and the like) in place of God are enveloped in still greater darkness, in other words, they are extremely foolish, fall into an awful hell of pain and sorrow, and suffer terribly for a long time."
[Yajur Veda 40:9.]
They enter darkness, those who worship natural things (for example air, water, sun, moon, animals, fire, stone, etc).
They sink deeper in darkness those who worship sambhuti. (Sambhuti means created things, for example table, chair, idol etc.)
[Yajurved 40:9]
Translation 2.
"Deep into shade of blinding gloom fall asambhuti's worshippers. They sink to darkness deeper yet who on sambhuti are intent."
[Yajurveda Samhita by Ralph T. H. Giffith pg 538]
Translation 3.
"They are enveloped in darkness, in other words, are steeped in ignorance and sunk in the greatest depths of misery who worship the uncreated, eternal prakrti -- the material cause of the world -- in place of the All-pervading God, But those who worship visible things born of the prakrti, such as the earth, trees, bodies (human and the like) in place of God are enveloped in still greater darkness, in other words, they are extremely foolish, fall into an awful hell of pain and sorrow, and suffer terribly for a long time."
[Yajur Veda 40:9.]
So, Yajur Veda indicates that:-
They sink deeper in darkness those who worship sambhuti. (Sambhuti means created things, for example table, chair, idol etc [Yajurved 40:9]
Those who worship visible things born of the prakrti, such as the earth, trees, bodies (human and the like) in place of God are enveloped in still greater darkness, in other words, they are extremely foolish, fall into an awful hell of pain and sorrow, and suffer terribly for a long time." [Yajur Veda 40:9.]
The religion of the Veda knows no idols
Max Müller says:- "The religion of the Veda knows no idols; the worship of idols in India is a secondary formation, a degradation of the more primitive worship of ideal gods."
Therefore, there was no individual god or temples and worships in Vedic religion, which exited prior to Buddhism. Thus the individualized gods and temples must have been built later on, when the worships of idol were introduced. Thus the Vedic religion which existed in the past was free from idol and nature worship and idol worshiping rituals.
Thus, the present days worship of individual gods, created things, nature and human are against Vedic teachings, and it looks like it has been fabricated and introduced by priest craft. Since it, has passed on from one generation to the next it is hard for the people to believe the truth of their own religion, because they have sentimentally and emotionally involved in it and they refuse to accept anything else other then their inherited beliefs.
Looking at the increasing number of fake god men and gurus and their scandals, it is high time for the truth seekers, who are capable of thinking must do deeper research and know the fact that, their inherited religious belief is mixed and messed up in the past and people are made to believe that it is their duty to protect their religion and their belief and tradition, which is the hotchpotch ideology and not the real non- dual philosophy. The ultimate truth lies beyond all religion, scriptures beliefs and philosophies.
It is impossible to find and realize the truth via religion and scriptural study. Even Upanishads conform this.
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 
Mundaka Upanishad Upanishads by Nikilanada]
Mundaka Upanishad Upanishads by Nikilanada]When the Upanishad says: the human goal is to acquire Self-Knowledge and they indicate the personal gods, scriptures, worship and rituals are not the means to Self –Knowledge, then why anyone should indulge in it. The religion, concept of individualized god and scriptures are greatest obstacle to realize non-dual truth or self-realization, because they are based on false self. The seeker of truth has to search the ultimate truth without losing himself in the labyrinths of philosophy, through deeper, inquiry, analysis and reasoning and assimilate and realize it.
