Without Sage Sri, Sankara the Advaitic wisdom is incomplete.***

Without Sage Sri, Sankara the Advaitic wisdom is incomplete. Without Advaitic wisdom, it is impossible to realize the truth, which is beyond the form, time, and space. The Advaitic wisdom is the  fullness of the truth.

Sage Sri Sankara’s whole teaching can be summed up into one sentence, ‘There is nothing else but Brahman. He says that the Absolute Existence, Absolute Knowledge, and Absolute Bliss are real. The universe is not real. He says that Brahma and Atman are one. The ultimate and the Absolute Truth is the Self, which is one though appearing as many different individuals. The individual has no reality. Only the Self is real; the rest, mental and physical are but passing appearances. 

Sage, 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.

This clearly indicates that religion, which is based on individual conduct, prescribes karma and Upasana to people of lower and middling intellect, therefore religion is for the lower intellect. And wisdom is for those are capable of inquiring into their own existence to know and realize the ultimate truth, which is Brahman.

Sri, Sankara: ~ “The illusion must be transcended by getting rid of the ignorance in order to realize the truth of the Soul which is the ultimate truth or Brahman.  

If Brahman is considered the all-pervading consciousness then, it is necessary to realize, the consciousness as the Self, which pervades all the three states, to realize the fact that, there is no second thing exists other the consciousness. Thus, consciousness (Atman) is the ultimate truth (Brahman).  

Genuine philosophy must be independent of religion, that in Sage Sri, Sankara himself the Saguna Brahman or a personal God is only a part of the phenomenal (if not illusory) world, and the Nirguna Brahman is the only reality and has nothing to do with religion.  

Sage Sri Sankara pokes fun at ascetics and points out that all their austerities do not cause desires to go (Altar Flowers" Page 205, v.2 P.207 v.4)

The Brahma Sutras together with Sage Sri Sankara's commentary thereon do not contain the higher wisdom. They are intended for those who are incapable of thinking rationally.

Sage Sri, Sankara's commentary on the Brahma Sutras is not on a philosophical basis, but on an orthodox and mystic basis, with an appeal to the Vedas as final authority.

In Brahma Sutra Sage Sri, 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 Sri, Sankara explains in Manduka that those who study the Sutras are orthodox minds, intellectual children, hence his popular view point 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.  A Gnani says the scriptures for children, but wise seekers will think rationally.

In Brahma Sutras Sage Sri, Sankara takes for granted, assumes that a world was created: He there mixes dogmatic theology with philosophy.

That God created the world is an absolute lie, nevertheless one will find Sage Sri, Sankara (in his commentary on Vedanta Sutras) clearly says this! He has to adapt his teachings to his audience, reserving the highest for philosophical minds.

The text of Brahma Sutras is based on religion, dogmatism, but in the commentary Sage Sri, Sankara cleverly introduced some philosophy. If it is objected that a number of Upanishads are equally dogmatic because they also begin by assuming Brahman, only a few Upanishads do not, but prove Brahman at the end of a train of proof.

Scholars translation of Brahma Sutras in Sacred Books of East must be read cautiously as he has not understood its highest sense, e.g. for Advaita they wrongly put "Unity" instead of “Non-duality."

Sage Sri Sankara gave religion and scholasticism and yoga no less than philosophy, to the seeking world. He was great enough to be able to do so. His commentary on Manduka is pure philosophy, but many of his other books are presented from a religious standpoint to help those who cannot rise up to philosophy.

Orthodoxy is the home of mysticism and deification that is why they are not keen rational truth. Thus, Sage Sankara is the Jagadguru to the religious followers and he is a great Sage (Gnani) of  the highest order to the seeking world.   

Adyathmic Discussion -331

Without knowing the nature of the universe, it is impossible to know the truth.

Without knowing the nature of the universe(mind), it is impossible to know the truth. It is of no use of trying to find the truth before one understands the nature of the universe. The world which confronts one is also consciousness itself therefore the world in which man exists is a mere mirage created out of consciousness, which is the innermost self. 

If one does not make his induction from facts from the world before him, the world of the five senses, he is only drawing on his imaginations. Then he says “The ‘Self’ is like this, or like that." but it will be only his imagination within the waking experience, which is mere illusion from ultimate standpoint. .

First seeker must inquire into the nature of the physical body i.e. Matter. Second he must inquire into the nature of the mind.

Most of the dualistic sages approach was more practical, and they stuck with the reality of the world, they took it as real. Whereas Sri, Sankara says: one 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.
 

Sage Sri, Sankara says- VC- 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..

By studying various scriptures one cannot be established in the true self, which is consciousness [soul] unless he drops all accumulated knowledge. Scriptures and yoga are preliminary steps but they are not the means to acquire self-knowledge or non-dual truth.

Getting certainty and irrefutable proof of our true existence without dogmatic assertion and assumption and speculation is the attitude of true seeker. One has to know the self in the truth.

All the study of scriptures and texts and teachings has to be dropped when one becomes aware of the fact that, the self is not physical but self is the soul (consciousness). One must think of always of the soul (consciousness) the witness of the three states; rather than the three states.

One may enjoy work or practice meditation but he will still yarn of that which is beyond all imagination ,all thinking and the objects and in which all the desire are extinguished. The subconscious goal of one’s search can only be non-duality.

Like ·  ·  · Share

• Satyam Sam Singh likes this.
• 

  Rs Mani Vedanta talks about Aham, i.e. the subject, idam, the objects and Eswara, the Lord, supposed to be the creator, all with the single purport of unfolding Aham Brahma Asmi!

  22 hours ago · Like · 1
• 

  Satyam Sam Singh When one become aware of one's own true nature, and the nature is nothing but 'The Soul Alone'; Whole existence with I (mind) along exists within 'The Soul' than there is no place for vedanta nor god. Everything is 'One Soul', there is nothing other than 'Soul'.

  10 hours ago · Unlike · 1
• 

  Santthosh Kumaar Sage Sri, Sankara founded his Advaita Vedanta either on reason independent of sruti or on sruti confirmed by reason." Sri, Sankara's commentary on the Mandukya 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.

  
  

  
  

  Sri, Sankara himself had often said that his philosophy was based on Sruti, or revealed scripture. This may be because Sri, 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. 

  
  

  Those who lack the intelligence to discriminate between formless witness [subject] and three states [object] will not be able to grasp what is real and what is unreal. Both subject and object are consciousness, not subject alone.

  
  

  The truth can never change. The nature of truth is, it can never be changed under any circumstances. It may be misrepresented. It must apply to the whole of existence, to the whole of the universe. It is in the object [three states] alone that one has all changes, as deeper analysis points out.

  8 minutes ago · Like
• 

  Santthosh Kumaar Why go round and round, by various tortuous paths

  
  

  
  

  When the Vedas and Upanishad declare that Consciousness or Atman is actually nothing but Brahman, then why go round and round, by various tortuous paths, like the blind led by the blind. One has to realize the fact that, the mind is in form of universe. Trace the source of mind and realize that source is consciousness. The mind rises from consciousness as waking or dream and subsides as deep sleep.

  5 minutes ago · Like
• 

  Santthosh Kumaar Sage Sri, Raman Maharshi said fortunate are the one who do not lose themselves in the labyrinths of philosophy. Bhagwan says: Take Vedanta, for instance: it speaks of 15 pranas the names and functions of it which the student is asked to commit memory. Will it not be sufficient if he thought only one prana does the whole work of maintaining the body? Again the antakaran is said to think, to desire, to will, to reason etc. Why all these details? Has anyone seen antakarana, or all these pranas? Do they really exist? They are conceptual divisions invented by teachers of philosophy by their excessive analysis. Where do all these concepts end? Why should confusion created and then explained away? Fortunate is the man who does not lose himself in the labyrinths of philosophy, but goes straight to the source from which they all arise. (GURU RAMANA .By S.S Cohen -vii Danger of philosophy-Page -58-59)

  
  

  
  

  The above passages further prove that: Self-Knowledge cannot be attained by study of the Vedas and intellectual understanding or by bookish knowledge. Therefore there is no use of studying the Vedas and other scriptures in order to acquire the non-dual wisdom. That is why Buddha rejected the scriptures, and even Sri, Sankara indicated that, the ultimate truth lies beyond religion, concept of god and scriptures. 

  
  

  Therefore, there is no use of taking strain to understand assimilate the conceptual divisions invented by teachers of philosophy by their excessive analysis. There are more and more doubts and confusions, if one tries to understand and assimilate the ultimate truth through scriptures. 

  
  

  Why to follow the path of doubts and confusion by losing oneself in the labyrinths of philosophy, when one can realize the ultimate truth without them. By mentally tracing the source of the mind from where it rises and subsides one becomes aware of the fallacy of the mind, which rises as waking or dream and subsides as deep sleep. The mind raises form consciousness and subsides as consciousness. Therefore, there is a need for perfect understanding assimilation of non-dual truth.

Santthosh Kumaar People say aham Brahmasmi -- I am God, I am Brahman. But when Brahman is, how can "I" remain? Only Brahman remains, not I. But there is no other way to express it.

a few seconds ago · Like

Adyathmic Discussion --330 ( 'I' itself is an illusion)

You are not the self. Till you hold ‘I’ as self you are holding false as reality. One has to get rid of the ‘I’. 'I' is the physical shackle. 

· ‘I’ is ignorance.

· ‘I’ is illusion.

· ‘I’ is duality

· ‘I’ is universe.

· ‘I’ is waking.

· ‘I’ is dream.

· ‘I’ is mind

What is ‘I’? The ‘I’ disappears in deep sleep, so what is the use of being attached to it? It is illusory.

There is really no ‘I’. It dies in deep sleep. But the notion of its unreality will gradually grasp by the receptive seekers. Individuality is illusory.--FORMLESS PATH

Like ·  ·  · Share · Edit

• Satyam Sam Singh, Bini P Varikattumalil and Suddha Chetan like this.
• 1 share
• 

  Tarun Patwal "I" is harmless in its practical sense........notion "I' is this that causes trouble

  22 hours ago · Like
• 

  Santthosh Kumaar The 'I' itself is an  illusion. Illusion is the cause of duality. duality is the illusory prison.The ‘I’, body, ego and the world appear together and disappear together. The reason disappears when ‘I’ disappears. Since everyone thinks ‘I’ as self all these doubts and confusion arises. Whenever there is ‘I’ there is division, conflict, which is disorder. 

  
  

  
  

  
  

  When ‘I’ disappears then there is universal order, which alone is real. The formless soul is Witness of the three states. One cannot say ‘I’ alone is illusion because ‘I’ is not the body but 'I' is mind. The mind is present in the form of universe. The universe appears as waking or dream (duality) and disappears as deep sleep (non-duality). Thus one has to learn to view and judge the three states on the standpoint of the formless witness, in order to know “what is truth” to know “what is untruth(illusion)”. 

  
  

  When ‘I’ is there all diversities is experienced. Absent of ‘I’ there is no experience of diversity. Thus there is a need to understand the fact that, ‘I’ or mind is not limited to the waking entity alone because 'I' is the whole universe. All the confusion will be cleared when one stops his verification on the base false self (waking entity or ego) and learns to reason on the base on the formless self (soul).