One day the science will declare that the universe is nothing but consciousness, which Sage Sankara declared 1200 years back.+

Both modern science and religion offer hypotheses and theories but there is one vital difference--science begins with facts which it collects; religion begins with fancies. Science evolves its hypotheses from such facts, religion from fancies.

Science declares that oxygen combines with hydrogen to give water. And it also declares oxygen is protons or electrons. But in pursuit of the truth,  the whole physical existence (universe or mind) is considered as an illusion, and science and its inventions, which are based on physical existence are limited to physical existence. The truth is within but it is beyond the physical existence.  Science demands physical proof.  But the physical proof is part of the illusion. Hence,  science cannot go beyond physicality because the truth cannot be traced with laboratory conditions.  Deeper Inquiry, analysis,  and reasoning are required if one wants to push its quest deeply enough.

The modern man appears to have acquired admirable knowledge in various fields of inventions in the physical world. However, what man has acquired is limited to the physical world not beyond.  The man has to admit the fact that he cannot investigate the truth of his own existence through scientific inventions because it is possible only through a deeper thinking process. Above all, acquired physical-based knowledge and power do not assure man of lasting happiness in the worldly life and peace evades him at every moment.

Max Planck: ~ “Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of nature. And that is because, in the last analysis, we ourselves are part of nature and therefore part of the mystery that we are trying to solve”

The scientists now concluded that the  'SELF' is not the brain (body). The consciousness requires the joint operation of the brain, body, and the world. The  "Self" is not your brain. The brain, rather, is part of what "SELF" is 

The Biology of Consciousness

by Alva Noë. Hill and Wang, 2009

 Alva Noe, a University of California, Berkeley, philosopher, and cognitive scientist, argues that after decades of a concerted effort on the part of neuroscientists, psychologists, and philosophers "only one proposition about how the brain makes us conscious ... has emerged unchallenged: we don't have a clue." The reason we have been unable to explain the neural basis of consciousness, he says, is that it does not take place in the brain. Consciousness is not something that happens inside us, but something we achieve is more like dancing than it is like the digestive process. To understand consciousness the fact that we think and feel and that the world shows up for us we need to look at a larger system in which the brain is only one element. Consciousness requires the joint operation of the brain, body, and the world. "You are not your brain. The brain, rather, is part of what you are."

Thus, science is going in the right direction in its invention, and one day the science will declare that the universe is nothing but consciousness, which Sage Sankara declared 1200 years back ~ everything is Aaman- because Atman is present in the form of consciousness.:~Santthosh Kumaar 

The path of wisdom is for the advanced seekers of truth.+

Everyone likes religion because it belongs to the world of sentiments and emotions. Religion changes as it appeals to different emotions. One will find at one pole the nude Sadhu is admired; at the other, the gorgeous life-styled Godman is revered. Belief in religious prohibitions arises out of fear of God's punishment.

The man himself suggests that there must be a God. It is autosuggestion. To say that one knows God exists always implies he must also exist always. It would be correct to say at this point, he does not know about the existence of God, because God's existence depends on an individualized belief. 

The path of religion, the path of yoga, and the path of wisdom were intended for different classes of people. The path of wisdom is for the advanced seekers of truth. It deals with the nature of the ultimate Truth and Reality. It is meant for superior aspirants who have an inner urge to know the truth and it is not for those who are immersed in earthly desires.

Religion is nothing to do with the ultimate truth of Brahman. If one is seeking the truth, then he has to be free from all the religious beliefs and dogmas. Religion is based on the ego (you), whereas, the ultimate truth is based on the Soul, the innermost Self. Whatever is based on the ego is an illusion and whatever is based on the Soul is ultimate reality or Brahman. Thus, religion has to be bifurcated from spirituality to realize the truth beyond form, time, and space. 

The Orthodox dualist and nondualists sects are nothing to do with the ultimate truth or Brahman. The Orthodox Advaita considers, birth, life, death, rebirth, heaven, hell, sin, karma, and the world as reality, whereas  Sage Sankara declares the world in which we exist is merely an illusion. If the world is an illusion, then birth, life, death, rebirth, heaven, hell, sin, karma, and the world, is bound to be an illusion. 

Without Sage Sankara, there is no Advaita (non-duality). Since it was mixed up with orthodoxy there is a lot of confusion. Sage Sankara’s quotes (selected verified) are quoted in my blogs and postings to show what Sage Sankara meant and ‘what is blocking the seekers from realizing the ultimate truth or Brahman. There are so many non-dualistic masters of the east and also from the west who expound Advaitic or non-dualistic knowledge, but none of them are helpful to reach the ultimate end.

According to Advaita Vedanta, the Veda addresses itself to two kinds of audiences - the ordinary ones who desire the transitory heaven and other pleasures obtained as a result of ritual sacrifices, and the more advanced seeker who seeks to know Brahman. Thus, the Purva mimam. sa, with its emphasis on the karma kanda of the Vedas, is meant for the first audience, to help lead its followers along the way. However, the Vedanta, with its emphasis on the Jnana kanda, is meant for those who wish to go beyond such transient pleasures.

In the end, the philosophy that will appeal to one mostly depends on his mental makeup.

The different paths are intended for different classes of people:~ 

Karma Yoga: ~ Suited for an individual with predominantly activity-oriented mental aptitude

Raja Yoga: ~ Suited for an individual with predominantly occult activity-oriented mental aptitude

Bhakti Yoga:~ Suited for individuals with a predominantly emotional aptitude

Gyan Yoga -Suited for individual who wishes to go beyond such transient pleasures.

Many people follow both Bhakti as well as Jnana. Advaitic sages in the past composed numerous hymns for various Gods and Goddesses by mixing both dual and non-dualistic ideas.

 

Many sages used to illustrate, the formless (Nirakar God) ocean water under the cold currents of bhakti freezes take a shape as a block of ice (Saakar God). The same ice (Saakar God) under the heat of Gyan dissolves and again becomes the formless ocean (Niraakar God).

All the Advaitins believe in god and goddesses (vidya) and performing rituals and other sacrifices (Avidya) both are a hindrance to Self-knowledge according to Ish Upanishads, then why the seeker of truth needs to worship the God and Goddesses, when the essence of Advaita is Ataman is Brahman (soul or self as the ultimate reality).  

When the Self is formless then there is no need for pada pooja (feet worship) Advaitin Gurus to get freedom. A Guru who preaches conduct 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 to understand and assimilate and realize the truth beyond physicality.

Sage Sankara said:~Neither by the practice of yoga nor philosophy, nor by good works, nor by learning, does liberation come, but only through the realization that Atman and Brahman are one in no other way.(1) VivekaChudamani v 56, pg 25

 Isa Upanishads indicates that:~  By worshipping gods and goddesses and going to the world of gods after death is of no use. The time one spends in ritualistic practices is wasted; one can spend the same time moving forward towards Self-knowledge, which is the main goal. One cannot reach the non-dual destination by glorifying gods and goddesses and by doing that, one goes deeper and deeper into the darkness. It surely indicates the fact that the seeker of truth has to drop the worshiping god and goddess to get the self-knowledge or Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana.

It also indicates that Religious Rituals (Avidya) are Karma (action) and therefore a hindrance. Performing Agnihotra and other sacrifices (Avidya) is a roundabout way of purifying the mind, and it is also groping in the dark.

In addition, it indicates that karma is limited only to religious rituals, not to the whole human life. This karma theory based on human conduct must have been adopted from Buddhism and other theories based on human conduct.  

Remember:~

When it says: Perform the obligatory karmas without any attachment to the fruits, and at the same time worship gods and goddesses, again without any desire to go to heaven - then you can get the benefit of both, liberation and bliss. For those who are not yet ready to renounce, this path is recommended, it means that the religion and its idea of god and goddesses and code of conduct, and its rituals are meant for the mass who are incapable of thinking of the beyond.

In addition, it also speaks of heaven the abode of gods, where one goes after death, and it speaks of rebirth, this contradiction, the seeker has to conclude that religion, rituals god, and its code of conduct is meant for the mass that is not receptive to self-knowledge.

When the self is not the body (‘I’) whatever one sees, knows, believes, experiences, and feels on the base of the body (‘I’) as self is bound to be an illusion. Thus, karma performed in illusion is bound to be an illusion. The birth, life, and death are happening within the illusion, therefore it is bound to be an illusion. Thus, rebirth and reincarnation theories based on the false self within the false experience are bound to be an illusion on the base of the true Self. Only the witness of the illusion is real (Brahman). Therefore, everything has to be viewed and judged, based on the Formless Witness (soul) to overcome the illusion/duality.

The seeker of truth has to know somewhere he is going wrong, and it is for the seeker to go on his own and remove the obstacle. The greatest hindrance is mixing religion, god, scriptures, and yogic theories. Moreover, attachment to scriptures, personal god, and religious code of conduct keep one permanently in the grip of duality.

Remember:~

The most valuable contribution of Sage Sankar is that he gained general consciousness on the issue that the authoritative explanation of Upanishads, Geeta, and Brahma Sutra was the final say in the matter of religion. Anything that goes contrary to the trio is not authentic. He also made a clear distinction between Vedas and Upanishads in his commentary on Geeta. He stated that the Karma Kand of the Vedas deals with the injunctions relating to the performance of duties and actions. These are for ordinary householders.

The path of religion, the path of yoga, and the path of wisdom were intended for different classes of people. The wisdom is for the advanced seekers of truth. It deals with the nature of the ultimate Truth and Reality. It is meant for superior aspirants who have an inner urge to know the truth and it is not for those who are immersed in earthly desires.

Sage Sankara’s whole wisdom can be summed up in 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 in different individuals. The individual has no reality. Only the Self is real; the rest, mental and physical are but passing appearances.

 Sage Sankara states a paradox ~ the world is and is not. It is neither real nor unreal. It leads us to recognize the existence of Maya. He thinks that the world is illusory from one perspective and the second it is nothing but Brahma, Itself in manifestation. This apparent world is Maya and has its basis in Brahman, the Eternal. It looks real. It has names and forms and actually, it is not real In the light of true knowledge, it disappears and Self-alone shines as real. However,   Sage Sankar’s Mayavad has not been accepted by many preachers and philosophers.

When Sage Sankara says clearly, the universe is not real. He says that Brahman and Atman are one. The ultimate and the Absolute Truth is the Self, which is one though appearing as many in different individuals. The individual has no reality. Only the Self is Real; the rest, mental and physical are but passing appearances, then it indicates the form (waking/duality/mind) is unreal the formless is real (Soul/Spirit). Therefore, only Atman is real because there is no second thing other than Atman.

Sage Sankara says:~  Of what avail are the Vedas and (other) Scriptures, Mantras (sacred formulae), and medicines to such a one?

For one who wants to acquire Self-knowledge or Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana, the mantas will not help to realize the truth, which is beyond form, time, and space.

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?

Let erudite scholars quote all the scripture, let Gods be invoked through sacrifices, let elaborate rituals be performed, let personal Gods be propitiated---yet, without the realization of one‘s identity With the Self, there shall be no liberation for the individual, not even in the lifetimes of a hundred Brahmas put together

A sickness of not cured by saying the word “medicine.” You must take the medicine. Liberation does not come by merely saying the word “Brahman.” Brahman must be experienced. Until you allow this apparent universe to dissolve from your consciousness until you have realized Brahman, how can you find liberation just by saying the word Brahman? The result is merely noise. Until a man has destroyed his enemies and taken possession of the splendor and wealth of the kingdom, he cannot become a king by simply saying “I am a king.”

A buried treasure is not uncovered by merely uttering the words: “Come forth.” You must follow the right directions, dig, remove the stones and earth from above it, and then make it your own. In the same way, the pure truth of the Atman, which is buried under Maya and the effects of Maya, can be reached by meditation, contemplation, and other spiritual disciplines but never by subtle arguments.

Remember:~

You and your physical Guru belong to the domain of duality. The duality is merely an illusion. Sticking to some guru emotionally within the duality is a great obstacle in the path of wisdom.

The world in which you and the guru exist is the product of ignorance. If there is no ignorance, then the world in which you and your guru exist cease to exist as a reality.

When reality appears this ignorance which one thinks as reality becomes unreal.

The ultimate truth has to be realized first without any philosophy, then only it is possible to know what the scriptures are saying. 

Reality is simply the loss of ignorance. Until the ignorance is there the body, ego and the world exist as a reality. When ignorance vanishes, then the Soul, the Self, remains in its awareness. In Self - awareness there is unity in diversity, thus there is only oneness. :~Santthosh Kumaar 

The Sages of truth are not religious Gurus or Saints.+

The look of an object will depend upon the medium through which the observer views it. In fact, our mental and intellectual conditions determine the three states, observed and experienced.  The commoner viewing the three states will see differently from a Gnani viewing the same three states. Each one interprets the three states that they see in terms of their existing knowledge. The commoner sees everything based on the ego, therefore, he experiences the birth, life, karma,  death, and the world as a reality, whereas a Gnani sees everything as the consciousness and he is fully aware of the fact that, there is no second thing exists other than the Soul or consciousness. 

Thus, all the egocentric (religious) adulteration has to be bifurcated to realize the ultimate truth or Brahman to know the truth propagated by the ancient sages of the truth. The sages of truth are not religious Gurus or saints.     

There is no need to follow anyone.  There is no need to follow any path.  The ultimate truth or Brahman is nothing to do with religions, philosophies,  some Guru's teachings.

The religious teachers, gurus, yogis are nothing to do with the ultimate truth or Brahman. They are merely propagators of their religious beliefs and theories.  Therefore, they cannot help in the quest of the Self.

Remember:~

Religion teaches one to look outside the Soul, the Self and promises a heaven and a reward outside the Soul, the innermost Self, is not the means to Self-realization.

Perfect understanding and realization of ‘what is what’, leads to non-dualistic or Advaitic Self-awareness.

Sentimentally and emotionally getting involved with some teachings or teachers is a great hindrance in the pursuit of truth. People hold their guru as the ultimate authority and drop their pursuit of truth and indulge in glorifying and worshiping the gurus, which keeps them permanently in ignorance.

For Gnani the world is an illusion. Viewed from the absolute, there's neither birth nor life nor death, neither the appearance nor the disappearance, neither the production nor the destruction, neither the bondage nor the liberation. There's none who neither seeks for freedom nor is there any who is liberated - this is the highest truth. 

A Gnani knows that there's neither unity nor plurality - the world is neither one nor many. Just as a piece of rope is mistaken for a snake, the Atman is mistaken as this diverse world. Duality is an appearance and the non-dual Atman is the real truth. 

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.

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.

The Advaitic orthodoxy is not the means to acquire Self-knowledge or Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana.  Advaitic orthodoxy is meant for the ignorant mass that is unfit to grasp the highest truth.   Thus, the Advaitic orthodoxy is nothing to do with the ultimate truth or Brahman. 

Sage Sankara disagrees with Buddhists who say, there is nothing - a nonentity. Sage Sri, Sankara believes there is some reality, even though things are not what they appear to be. If one knows the truth, he will know what to do to find inspiration for action.  The seeker of truth‘s subject is to know what is it that is Real.

Buddhism says:~ all things are illusory and nothing exists.  However, Advaita avers that it is not so.  It says that the universe, of course, is illusory, but there is Brahman (consciousness), that exists, forming the very substratum of all things (illusion or universe).

The ignorant are always egocentric. He thinks what he knows is the truth.  He always indulges in pursuit of an argument.  The ignorant is sentimentalized to his belief system.  An ignorant person just to prove that he is correct and others are wrong because the ignorant presumes he already knows and wants to see whether others know or not. 

The ignorant person provokes others to snub them. Ignorant accumulates knowledge and tries to show his intellectual wealth. Such intellectual sharing of knowledge is mere garbage. It is of no use in pursuit of truth. Because they are egocentric based on ignorance thus they will not yield any truth.:~Santthosh Kumaar 

Sage Sankara's Advaita does not need the support of any scripture or revelation like the Vedas.+

Advaitic view~

Sage Sankara's system of Advaita does not need the support of any Scripture or Revelation like the Vedas. The Srutis may all disappear, yet will his school stand.  Since 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 color or creed or clime.

The tenet of Nirguna Brahman is true for Sage Sankara, not because it is taught by the Sruti, but because it is based on anubhava (intuitive experience) though it is also supported by the Sruti... The Advaitin knows that a legitimate doubt may have here to arise.  The Rishis may have truly spoken, but they may have been deluded themselves.  How are we certain that what the Rishis cognized is the Reality or Truth?  This can be proved according to the Advaita, only by the realization of truth beyond the form, time, and space.

And also:~

Again, in the absence of this realization, Nirguna Brahman as an object of thought is mere sound without sense. To one who has not seen a penguin, for instance, the word has no meaning ... Of what use, then, is such Sruti to him?  Similarly, common sense tells the Advaitin that the meaning of the Sruti and especially where there are conflicting interpretations is made out by means of reasoning based upon the authority of realization, which is final.

Thus, the reason comes into play between Sruti and realization corroborating the data of intuition with those of the revealed texts.

But reason also permits discrimination between the different possible experiences, for, in an a priori astonishing fashion:

Realization  ... can reveal not two, but twenty thousand conflicting experiences.  And the business of the wise is to sift the ultimate truth from out of all these ... The Advaitin rejects nothing.  All human experiences are his data.  He tests all by reason.

Only the Advaita can reply: it is the witness, the Seer. The Buddhists are in error in regards to the finite ego as illusory, and as having nothing more behind it: but they would have been perfectly correct in such outlook had they added the notion of the witness. How is it that Skandhas come together and compose the ego? Who sees them come and go? It is the witness, the Atman, and this lack Vedanta supplies in the seer and seen and reason Analysis. When they say that the mind comes and goes they are forgetting that there must be another part of the mind as consciousness that notices it and which tells them of this disappearance and appearance. All their misunderstandings arise from the fact that Buddha refused to discuss the ultimate questions. When Buddhism degenerates into Nihilism Advitin refutes it ( Manduka P.281).

The truth of a single reality within or underlying the illusory ego is all-important and without it Buddhism becomes fallacious.

Vedanta admits the transitoriness and evanescence of thoughts just like Buddhism, but not of the Mind which observes this transitoriness and knows it.

Manduka Upanishad:~  Buddhists borrowed from Upanishads because they were Indians. The Vedantins did not need to borrow from Buddhism therefore (P.396 v.99)

Bhagavan Buddha taught the illusoriness of ego but did not go further, probably because he thought the world could not understand the higher truth. Hence followers go with him to that point of his and then deny the Vedantic doctrine of one supreme reality when the Bhagavan Buddha himself neither denied nor advocated it. Anyway, the refutation of his followers is to ask them “What is it that is aware of the ego's illusoriness?" There must be something that tells you that. That something is the  Drik, and if you say this Drik itself may be illusory, coming and going, still there must be something non-transient i.e.permanent, to tell you this.

Bhagavan Buddha's teachings that all life is misery belongs to the relative standpoint only. For you cannot form any idea of misery without contrasting it with its opposite, happiness. The two will always go together.

Bhagavan Buddha taught the goal of cessation of misery, i.e. peace, but took care not to discuss the ultimate standpoint for then he would have had to go above the heads of the people and tell them that misery itself was only an idea, that peace even was an idea (for it contrasted with peacelessness). That the doctrine he gave out was a limited one, is evident because he inculcated compassion. Why should a Buddhist sage practice pity? There is no reason for it.

Advaita is the next step higher than Buddhism because it gives the missing reason, viz. unity, non-difference from others, and because it explains that it used the concept of removing the sufferings of others, of lifting them up to happiness, only as we use one thorn to pick out another, afterward throw both away. Similarly, Advaita discards both concepts of misery and happiness in the ultimate standpoint of non-duality, which is indescribable.

Buddhists say that a thing exists only for a moment, and if that thing has still got some of the substance from which it was produced how then can they deny that its cause is continuing in the effect; hence its existence is more than a moment. Vedanta is concerned with whether it is one and the same thing which has come into being or has it come out of nothing.

Even the Sunyavada ultimate of the "void" is really a breath, and therefore an imagination and not truth.

Bhagavan Buddha as a constructive worker committed an error in failing to give the masses a religion, something tangible they could grasp, something materialistic, if symbolic that their limited intellect could take hold of, in addition to his ethics and philosophy. Here  Sage Sankara was wiser and gave the religion; such as rituals and karma to the ignorant masses, as well as Advaitic wisdom to those who are capable to grasp the truth hidden by the 'I'. 

Bhagavan Buddha gave as the central feature of his doctrine the great law of Karma in order to reiterate its ethical meaning. He did more good in this to uplift the people than the ritualists.

Tibetan and Chinese Buddhists who say that there are many Buddhas living in spirit bodies and helping our earth from the spiritual world are still in the sphere of religious illusion, not the ultimate truth. Their statements are wrong. 

Every sage realizes that the only way to help mankind is to come down amongst them, for which he must necessarily take on flesh-body. When people are suffering how can he relieve their suffering unless he appears amongst them? When people are suffering how can he feed them from an unseen world whether their struggle is for material bread or for spiritual truth? No! He must be here actually in the flesh. It is impossible to help them in any other way and all talk of Shiva living on Mount Kailas in the spiritual body or Buddha in Nirmanakaya, invisible body belongs to the realm of delusion or Self-deception. :~Santthosh Kumaar