When the Self not the form, but the Self is formless Soul, then there is no need for Pada Pooja (feet worship) of Advaitin Gurus to get freedom.+

When the Self, not the form, but the Self is formless soul, then there is no need for Pada Pooja (feet worship) of Advaitin Gurus to get freedom. A guru, who preaches conduct (action or karma) as the means to freedom, believes in birth, life, death, and the world as reality, whereas the Advaitic Sage Sankara declares,  the world as unreal. Therefore, how actions performed in the unreal world can get Moksha or freedom. Therefore, there is a need to know the fact that, the self is not physical in order to understand and assimilate and realize the truth beyond physicality. 

Vedas bars human worship: ~

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.)

Then why worship and glorify the GURUS and YOGIS (human form) in place of God when Veda bars such activities and also warns people who indulge in such activities 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.

The Upanishads are the only scriptures in the world that say: ~

It is impossible to find and realize the truth via religion and scriptural study. 

Sage Sankara's commentary:~

 Page 489: "The knower of Brahman (self-realized or Gnani) wears no signs.

 Page 500 asks in effect: "Tell us what you know, show it, and let us examine it under the mental microscope." It means we must bring notions and beliefs out of vagueness into clearness. It also criticizes the mystics who claim superior knowledge, but who cannot communicate it for purposes of verification. 

On page 482: On Gnani: "The knower of Brahman wears no signs. Gives up the insignia of a monk's life…his signs are not manifest, nor his behavior." When the knower of Brahman wears no signs -- it means he does not identify himself as a guru or a teacher.

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). 

Thus, it proves that the one who identifies himself as a Guru or a Swami is not a Gnani. 

The one who identifies himself as a swami,  a guru, or a  yogi is not a Gnani. A Gnani never identifies himself as swami, guru, pundit, or yogi. Swami, guru, pundit, or yogi belongs to the religious and yogic path, not to the Path of truth or the Path of wisdom. 

That is why Sage Sankara: ~ "Though I wear these robes of a Sanyasin, it is only for the sake of bread." Exploring if an outside observer can, in all cases, determine if a person is Enlightened or not, the venerated Indian Sanyasin, Sage Sankara, in his work The Crest Jewel of Discrimination (1) or as it is sometimes known, Viveka Chudamani (2), states that the Knower of the Atman (i.e., a Gnani) "bears no outward mark of a holy man" (Stanza 539).

 

Continuing, although there are variances found in the actual wording between various translators and translations the gist behind the words remains the same, Sage Sankara writes:~ “Sometimes he appears to be a Fool, sometimes a wise man. Sometimes he seems splendid as a king, sometimes feeble-minded. Sometimes he is calm and silent. Sometimes he draws men to him. Sometimes people honor him greatly, sometimes they insult him. Sometimes they ignore him.

In the Vedic era, a Brahmin was a person who had acquired Self- knowledge or Brahma Gnana Atma Gnana. This was extremely a difficult path of the discipline of body, mind, and intellect, and people irrespective of their birth or class, who dedicated to such an austere life, were recognized as Brahmins. 

A great example of this tradition (that a person becoming a Brahmin, rather than born as one) is the case of Vishwamitra, a warrior (Kshatriya), who became a Brahmin after attaining Atma Jnana or Self-Knowledge.

A smritis or code of conduct composed by sage Atri defines brahminhood very clearly:~

"By birth, every man is a Shudra (an ignorant person). Through various types of disciplines (samskaras), he becomes a dwija (twice-born). Through the studies of the scriptures, he becomes a vipra (or a scholar). Through the realization of  a supreme spirit (Brahma jnana), he becomes a Brahmin."

The belief that people born in the Brahmin caste automatically becomes Brahmins, which is a much later concept in the very ancient India. Thus, Brahmin means not the caste but, one who has attained Atma Jnana or Brahma Jnana. 

Sage Sankara, in Bhaja Govindam, says: - (Jnana Viheena Sarva Mathena Bajathi na Muktim janma Shatena) ~ One without knowledge does not obtain liberation even in a hundred births, no matter which religious faith he follows. 

Thus, it proves that religion is not the means to Self-knowledge or Bramha Gnana or Atma Gnana. : ~ Santthosh Kumaar