Advaita Vedanta (IAST Advaita Vedānta; Sanskrit: अद्वैत वेदान्त [əd̪ʋait̪ə ʋeːd̪ɑːnt̪ə]) is considered to be the most influential[1] and most dominant[2][3] sub-school of the Vedānta (literally, end or the goal of the Vedas, Sanskrit) school of Hindu philosophy.[4] Other major sub-schools of Vedānta are Viśishṭādvaita and Dvaita; while the minor ones include Suddhadvaita, Dvaitadvaita and Achintya Bhedabheda. Advaita (literally, non-duality) is a system of thought where "Advaita" refers to the identity of the Self (Atman) and the Whole (Brahman).[5]
The key source texts for all schools of Vedānta are the Prasthanatrayi—the canonical texts consisting of the Upanishads, the Bhagavad Gita and the Brahma Sutras. The first person to explicitly consolidate the principles of Advaita Vedanta was Shankara Bhagavadpada,[6] while the first historical proponent was Gaudapada, the guru of Shankara's guru Govinda Bhagavatpada.
Contents |
According to Sankara and others, anyone seeking to follow the philosophy of advaita vedanta must do so under the guidance of a Guru (teacher).[7] The Guru must have the following qualities (see Mundaka Upanishad 1.2.12):
The seeker must serve the Guru, and submit questions with all humility in order to remove all doubts (see Bhagavad Gita 4.34). By doing so, Advaita says, the seeker will attain moksha ('liberation from the cycle of births and deaths').
According to Adi Sankara, knowledge of Brahman springs from inquiry into the words of the Upanishads, and the knowledge of Brahman that Sruti provides cannot be obtained in any other way. It is the teacher who through exegesis of Sruti and skillful handling of words generates a hitherto unknown knowledge in the disciple. The teacher does not merely provide stimulus or suggestion.[8]
Any mumukṣu (one seeking moksha) has to have the following four Sampattis (qualifications), collectively called Sādhana Chatuṣṭaya Sampatti ("the fourfold qualifications"):
Adi Shankara states in Tattva bodha (1.2) that moksha is available only to those possessing the above-mentioned fourfold qualifications. Thus any seeker wishing to study advaita vedānta from a teacher must possess these.
Pramā, in Sanskrit, refers to the correct knowledge, arrived at by thorough reasoning, of any object. Pramāṇa (means of knowledge, Sanskrit) forms one part of a tripuṭi (trio), namely,
In the Bhāṭṭa school of Mimāṃsā of Advaita Vedānta, the following pramāṇas are accepted (the Prābhākara school do not accept Anupaladbhi ):
That which is immediately perceived to be so; This knowledge can be corrected, i.e. if one perceives a piece of rope to be a snake.
That which is perceived as true through previous knowledge, i.e. to knows that it is a fire because you see smoke in the sky (the two are related through a universal law)
That which is perceived as true since it compares to previous, confirmed, knowledge. To know that something is something, i.e. a cat, because one has seen cats before.
That which is true through a negation. Claasic e.g. karatale ghato nasti - the pot is not on the palm. The pot could be elsewhere. So the place (on the palm) of its absence is also important.
I.e. To see someone gain weight while knowing they are fasting, imposes the knowledge that the person is secretly eating.
The kārya (effect) and kāraṇa (cause) form an important area for investigation in all the systems of Vedanta. Two kāraṇatvas (ways of being the cause) are recognised:
Advaita assigns Nimitta kāraṇatva to Brahman with the statements from the Vedas (only two are given below):
sarvāṇi rūpāṇi vicitya dhīraḥ, nāmāni kṛtvābhivadan yadāste — That Lord has created all the forms and is calling them by their names (Taitiiriya Aranyaka 3.12.7)
sa īkṣata lokānnu sṛjā iti — He thought, "Let Me create the worlds" (Aitareya Upanishad[11] 1.1.1)
Advaita also assigns Upādāna kāraṇatva to Brahman vide the statements from the Vedas (only two are given below):
yathā somya! ekena mṛtpinḍena sarvaṃ mṛnmayaṃ vijñātaṃ syād vācāraṃbhaṇaṃ vikāro nāmadheyaṃ mṛttiketyeva satyaṃ — Dear boy, just as through a single clod of clay all that is made of clay would become known, for all modifications is but name based upon words and the clay alone is real (Chandogya Upanishad[12] 6.1.4)
so'kāmayata bahu syāṃ prajāyeyeti — (He thought) Let me be many, let me be born (Taittiriya Upanishad[13] 2.6.4)
The Chandogya Upanishad[12] 6.2.1 states
ekamevādvitīyaṃ — It is One without a second
Thus, based on these and other statements found in the Vedas, Advaita concludes that Brahman is both the instrumental cause and the material cause.
Advaita states that kārya (effect) is non-different from kāraṇa (cause). However kāraṇa is different from kārya. This principle is called kārya-kāraṇa ananyatva (the non-difference of the effect from the cause). To elaborate, if the cause is destroyed, the effect will no longer exist. For example, if from the effect, cotton cloth, the cause, threads, are removed, there will be no cloth, i.e., the cloth is destroyed. Similarly if in the effect, thread, the cause, cotton, is removed, there will be no thread, i.e., the thread is destroyed. This is brought out by Adi Shankara in the Brahmasūtra-Bhāṣya , commentary on the Brahma-Sutra,[14] 2.1.9, as:
ananyatve'pi kāryakāraṇayoḥ kāryasya kāraṇātmatvaṃ na tu kāraṇasya kāryātmatvaṃ — Despite the non-difference of cause and effect, the effect has its self in the cause but not the cause in the effect. The effect is of the nature of the cause and not the cause the nature of the effect. Therefore the qualities of the effect cannot touch the cause.
During the time of its existence, one can easily grasp that the effect is not different from the cause. However that the cause is different from the effect is not readily understood. As to this, it is not really possible to separate cause from effect. But this is possible by imagining so. For example, the reflection of the gold ornament seen in the mirror is only the form of the ornament but is not the ornament itself as it (the reflection) has no gold in it at all. Adi Shankara says in the Chāṃdogya Upaniṣad Bhāṣya, commentary on the Chandogya Upanishad, 6.3.2:
sarvaṃ ca nāmarūpādi sadātmanaiva satyaṃ vikārajātaṃ svatastu anṛtameva — All names and forms are real when seen with the Sat (Brahman) but are false when seen independent of Brahman.
This way Advaita establishes the non-difference of effect from causing action. To put it in a nutshell,
In the context of Advaita Vedanta, Jagat (the world) is not different from Brahman; however Brahman is different from Jagat.
According to Adi Shankara, God, the Supreme Cosmic Spirit or Brahman is the One, the whole and the only reality. Other than Brahman, everything else, including the universe, material objects and individuals, are false. Brahman is at best described as that infinite, omnipresent, omnipotent, incorporeal, impersonal, transcendent reality that is the divine ground of all Being. Brahman is often described as neti neti meaning "not this, not this" because Brahman cannot be correctly described as this or that. 'It' (grammatically neutral, but exceptionally treated as masculine) is the origin of this and that, the origin of forces, substances, all of existence, the undefined, the basis of all, unborn, the essential truth, unchanging, eternal, the absolute. How can it be properly described as something in the material world when itself is the basis of reality? Brahman is also beyond the senses, it would be akin a blind man trying to correctly describe color. It, though not necessarily a form of physical matter, is the substrate of the material world, which in turn is its illusory transformation. Brahman is not the effect of the world. Brahman is said to be the purest knowledge itself, and is illuminant like a source of infinite light.
Due to ignorance (avidyā), the Brahman is visible as the material world and its objects. The actual Brahman is attributeless and formless (see Nirguna Brahman). It is the Self-existent, the Absolute and the Imperishable. Brahman is actually indescribable. It is at best Satchidananda (merging "Sat" + "Chit" + "Ananda", i.e., Infinite Truth, Infinite Consciousness and Infinite Bliss). Also, Brahman is free from any kind of differences or differentiation. It does not have any sajātīya (homogeneous) differentiation because there is no second Brahman. It does not have any vijātīya (heterogeneous) differentiation because there is nobody in reality existing other than Brahman. It has neither svagata (internal) differences, because Brahman is itself homogeneous.
Adi Shankara also proposed some logical proofs:
Georg Feuerstein summarizes the advaita realization as follows: "The manifold universe is, in truth, a Single Reality. There is only one Great Being, which the sages call Brahman, in which all the countless forms of existence reside. That Great Being is utter Consciousness, and It is the very Essence, or Self (Atman) of all beings."[15]
Māyā (/mɑːjɑː/) According to Adi Shankara, Māyā is the complex illusionary power of Brahman which causes the Brahman to be seen as the material world of separate forms. Maya has two main functions — one is to "hide" Brahman from ordinary human perception, and the other is to present the material world in its (Brahmam) place. Māyā is also said to be indescribable, though it may be said that all sense data entering ones awareness via the five senses are Māyā, since the fundamental reality underlying sensory perception is completely hidden. It is also said that Māyā is neither completely real nor completely unreal, hence indescribable. Its shelter is Brahman, but Brahman itself is untouched by the illusion of Māyā, just as a magician is not tricked by his own magic. Māyā is temporary and is transcended with "true knowledge," or perception of the more fundamental reality which permeates Māyā.
Since, according to the Upanishads, only Brahman is real, and yet the material world is seen as real, Adi Shankara explained the anomaly by the concept of this illusionary power of Māyā.
Adi Sankara says that the world is not real (true), it is an illusion, but this is because of some logical reasons. Let us first analyze Adi Sankara's definition of Truth, and hence why the world is not considered real (true).
On the other hand, Adi Sankara claims that the world is not absolutely unreal (false). It appears unreal (false) only when compared to Brahman. In the pragmatic state, the world is completely real—which occurs as long as we are under the influence of Maya. The world cannot be both true and false at the same time; hence Adi Shankara has classified the world as indescribable. The following points suggest that according to Adi Sankara, the world is not false (Adi Shankara himself gave most of the arguments, Sinha, 1993):
Consider the following logical argument. A pen is placed in front of a mirror. One can see its reflection. To one's eyes, the image of the pen is perceived. Now, what should the image be called? It cannot be true, because it is an image. The truth is the pen. It cannot be false, because it is seen by our eyes.
Īsvara (pronounced [ˈiːʃvərə], literally, the Lord) Parama Īshvara means "The Supreme Lord"— According to Advaita Vedanta, when man tries to know the attributeless Brahman with his mind, under the influence of Maya, Brahman becomes the Lord. Isvara is Brahman with Maya — the manifested form of Brahman. Adi Shankara uses a metaphor that when the "reflection" of the Cosmic Spirit falls upon the mirror of Maya, it appears as the Ishvara or Supreme Lord. The Ishvara is true only in the pragmatic level. God's actual form in the transcendental level is the Cosmic Spirit.
Ishvara can be described as Saguna Brahman or Brahman with attributes that may be regarded to have a personality with human and Godly attributes. This concept of Ishvara is also used to visualize and worship in anthropomorphic form deities such as Shiva, Vishnu or Devi by the dvaitins which leads to immense confusion in the understanding of a monistic concept of God apart from polytheistic worship of Vishnu, Shiva and Shakti in Hinduism .
Now the question arises as to why the Ishvara created the world. If one assumes that Ishvara creates the world for any incentive, this slanders the wholeness and perfection of Ishvara. For example, if one assumes that Ishvara creates the world for gaining something, it would be against His perfection. If we assume that He creates for compassion, it would be illogical, because the emotion of compassion cannot arise in a blank and void world in the beginning (when only Ishvara existed). So Adi Shankara assumes that Creation is recreation or play of Ishvara. It is His nature, just as it is man's nature to breathe.
The sole proof for Ishvara that Adi Shankara gives is Shruti's mentions of Ishvara, as Ishvara is beyond logic and thinking. This is similar to Kant's philosophy about Ishvara in which he says that "faith" is the basis of theism. However, Adi Shankara has also given few other logical proofs for Ishvara, but warning us not to completely rely on them:
To think that there is no place for a personal God (Ishvara) in Advaita Vedanta is a misunderstanding of the philosophy. Ishvara is, in an ultimate sense, described as "false" because Brahman appears as Ishvara only due to the curtain of Maya. However, as described earlier, just as the world is true in the pragmatic level, similarly, Ishvara is also pragmatically true. Just as the world is not absolutely false, Ishvara is also not absolutely false. He is the distributor of the fruits of one's Karma. Whenever we talk about Brahman, we are in fact talking about God. God is the highest knowledge theoretically possible. Devotion (Bhakti) will cancel the effects of bad Karma and will bring a person closer to the true knowledge by purifying his mind. Slowly, the difference between the worshipper and the worshipped decreases and upon true knowledge, liberation occurs.
The soul or the self (Atman) is identical with Brahman. It is not a part of Brahman that ultimately dissolves into Brahman, but the whole Brahman itself. Now the arguers ask how the individual soul, which is limited and one in each body, can be the same as Brahman? Adi Shankara explains that the Self is not an individual concept. Atman is only one and unique. Indeed Atman alone is Ekaatma Vaadam. It is a false concept that there are several Atmans (Anekaatma Vaadam. Adi Shankara says that just as the same moon appears as several moons on its reflections on the surface of water covered with bubbles, the one Atman appears as multiple atmans in our bodies because of Maya.
Atman is self-proven, however, some proofs are discussed—e.g., a person says "I am blind", "I am happy", "I am fat" etc. The common and constant factor, which permeates all these statements is the "I" which is but the Immutable Consciousness. When the blindness, happiness, fatness are inquired and negated, "I" the common factor which, indeed, alone exists in all three states of consciousness and in all three periods of time, shines forth. This proves the existence of Atman, and that Consciousness, Reality and Bliss are its characteristics. Atman, being the silent witness of all the modifications, is free and beyond sin and merit. It does not experience happiness or pain because it is beyond the triad of Experiencer, Experienced and Experiencing. It does not do any Karma because it is Aaptakaama. It is incorporeal and independent.
When the reflection of atman falls on avidya (ignorance), atman becomes jīva — a living being with a body and senses. Each jiva feels as if he has his own, unique and distinct Atman, called jivatman. The concept of jiva is true only in the pragmatic level. In the transcendental level, only the one Atman, equal to Brahman, is true.
Adi Shankara exposed the relative and thus unreal nature of the objective world and propounded the truth of the Advaita {One without a second} by analysing the three states of experience of the atman — waking (vaishvanara), dreaming (taijasa), and deep sleep (prajna).
Advaitins believe that suffering is due to Maya, and only knowledge (called Jnana) of Brahman can destroy Maya. When Maya is removed, there exists ultimately no difference between the Jiva-Atman and the Brahman. Such a state of bliss when achieved while living is called Jivanmukta. While one is in the pragmatic level, one can worship God in any way and in any form, like Krishna or Ayyappa as he wishes, Adi Shankara himself was a proponent of devotional worship or Bhakti. But Adi Shankara believes that while Vedic sacrifices, puja and devotional worship can lead one in the direction of jnana (true knowledge) they cannot lead one directly to moksha.
In the relative level, Adi Shankara believes in the Creation of the world through Satkāryavāda. It is like the philosophy of Samkhya, which says that the cause is always hidden into its effect—and the effect is just a transformation of the cause. However, Samkhya believes in a sub-form of Satkāryavāda called Parinamavada (evolution) — whereby the cause really becomes an effect. Instead, Adi Shankara believes in a sub-form called Vivartavada. According to this, the effect is merely an apparent transformation of its cause — like illusion. For example, in darkness a man often confuses a rope to be a snake. But this does not mean that the rope has actually transformed into a snake.
At the pragmatic level, the universe is believed to be the creation of the Supreme Lord Ishvara. Maya is the divine magic of Ishvara, with the help of which Ishvara creates the world. The serial of Creation is taken from the Upanishads. First of all, the five subtle elements (ether, air, fire, water and earth) are created from Ishvara. Ether is created by Maya. From ether, air is born. From air, fire is born. From fire, water is born. From water, earth is born. From a proportional combination of all five subtle elements, the five gross elements are created, like the gross sky, the gross fire, etc. From these gross elements, the universe and life are created. This series is exactly the opposite during destruction.
Some people have criticized that these principles are against Satkāryavāda. According to Satkāryavāda, the cause is hidden inside the effect. How can Ishvara, whose form is spiritual, be the effect of this material world? Adi Shankara says that just as from a conscious living human, inanimate objects like hair and nails are formed, similarly, the inanimate world is formed from the spiritual Ishvara.
Some claim that there is no place for ethics in Advaita, because everything is ultimately illusionary. But on analysis, ethics also has a firm place in this philosophy—the same place as the world and God. Ethics, which implies doing good Karma, indirectly helps in attaining true knowledge. The traditional ethical system put forth by Advaitins is that the basis of merit and sin is the Shruti (the Vedas and the Upanishads). Truth, non-violence, service of others, pity, etc. are Dharma, and lies, violence, cheating, selfishness, greed, etc. are adharma (sin). However, no authoritative definition of Dharma was ever formulated by any of the major exponents of Advaita Vedanta. Unlike ontological and epistemological claims, there is room for significant disagreement between Advaitins on ethical issues.
Many Advaitins consider Karma a "necessary fiction". Karma cannot be proven to be exist through any of the Pramāṇas (with the exception of Āgama, though this is contradicted, subtrated, by the Pramāṇas such as Anumāna, Upamāna, or Arthāpatti) to exist; However, to encourage students to strive towards Vidyā (spiritual knowledge) and combat Avidyā (ignorance), the idea of Karma is maintained, so even if students fail to reach Vidyā in this life, Karmic acts in this life will improve the chances in the next life.
Mahavakya, or "the great sentences", state the unity of Brahman and Atman. There are many such sentences in the Vedas, however only one such sentence from each of the four Vedas is usually chosen. They are shown below
| Sr. No. | Vakya | Meaning | Upanishad | Veda |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | प्रज्ञानं ब्रह्म (prajñānam brahma) | Consciousness is Brahman | Aitareya | Rgveda |
| 2. | अहं ब्रह्मास्मि (aham brahmāsmi) | I am Brahman | Brhadāranyaka | Yajurveda |
| 3. | तत्त्वमसि (tat tvam asi) | That thou art | Chandogya | Samaveda |
| 4. | अयमात्मा ब्रह्म (ayamātmā brahma) | This Atman is Brahman | Mandukya | Atharvaveda |
Adi Shankara consolidated the Advaita Vedanta, an interpretation of the Vedic scriptures that was approved and accepted by Gaudapada and Govinda Bhagavatpada siddhānta (system). Continuing the line of thought of some of the Upanishadic teachers, and also that of his own teacher's teacher Gaudapada, (Ajativada), Adi Shankara expounded the doctrine of Advaita — a nondualistic reality.
He wrote commentaries on the Prasthana Trayi. A famous quote from Vivekacūḍāmaṇi, one of his Prakaraṇa graṃthas (philosophical treatises) that succinctly summarizes his philosophy is the following:[16]
Brahma satyaṃ jagat mithyā, jīvo brahmaiva nāparah — Brahman is the only truth, the world is an illusion, and there is ultimately no difference between Brahman and individual self
In his metaphysics, there are three tiers of reality with each one more real than the previous. The category illusion in this system is unreal only from the viewpoint of the absolutely real and is different from the category of the Absolutely unreal. His system of vedanta introduced the method of scholarly exegesis on the accepted metaphysics of the Upanishads, and this style was adopted by all the later vedanta schools. Another distinctive feature of his work is his refusal to be literal about scriptural statements and adoption of symbolic interpretation where he considered it appropriate. In a famous passage in his commentary on the Brahmasutra's of Badarayana, he says "For each means of knowledge {PramaNam} has a valid domain. The domain of the scriptures {Shabda PramaNam} is the knowledge of the Self. If the scriptures say something about another domain - like the world around us - which contradicts what perception {Pratyaksha PramaNam} and inference {Anumana PramaNam} (the appropriate methods of knowledge for this domain) tells us, then, the scriptural statements have to be symbolically interpreted..."
Adi Shankara's contributions to Advaita are crucial. His main works are the commentaries on the Prasthanatrayi (Brahma Sūtras, Bhagavad Gītā and the Upanishads) and the Gaudapadiya Karikas. He also wrote a major independent treatise, called "Upadeśa Sāhasrī", expounding his philosophy.
In the Indian religious and philosophical traditions, all knowledge is traced back to the Gods and to the Rishis who saw the vedas. Thus, the advaita guru-paramparā (Lineage of Gurus in Non-dualism) begins with the Daiva-paramparā , followed by the Ṛṣi-paramparā, which includes the vedic seers Vaśiṣṭha, Śakti, Parāśara, his son Vyāsa, (the famous redactor of the vedas, he is also traditionally identified with Bādarāyaṇa, the composer of the Brahmasūtras), and Vyāsa's son Śuka. After Śuka, we turn to the Mānava-paramparā, which brings us to historical times and personalities.[17]
The following well known Sanskrit Verse among Smarthas provides the list of the early teachers of the Vedanta in their order[18],[19]
| “ |
|
” |
|
—अद्वैत गुरु परंपरा स्तोत्रम् |
||
| “ |
|
” |
|
—Advaita Guru Paramparā Stotram |
||
The above advaita guru paramparā verse salute the prominent gurus of advaita, starting from Nārāyaṇa through Adi Sankara and his disciples, upto the Acharyas of today. The paramparā thus lists:
Although Shankara's Advaita, like other traditions of Vedanta, officially bases itself chiefly on the teachings of select Upanishads, a collection of philosophical works that include Pre-Buddhist, Buddhist era and Post-Buddhist texts,[20] many authorities from India and elsewhere have noted that it shows signs of influence from Mahayana Buddhism. The Mahayana schools with whom Shankara's Advaita is said to share some similarities are the Madhyamaka and the Yogacara,[21] founded by the Brahmins Nagarjuna,[22] Vasubandhu[23] and Asanga.[24]
NV Isaeva opines that the Advaita and Buddhist philosophies, after being purified of accidental or historical accretions, can be safely regarded as different expressions of the same eternal absolute truth.[25] This is echoed by Ninian Smart, a historian of religion, who notes that the differences between Shankara and Mahayana doctrines are largely a matter of emphasis and background than essence.[26]
In India, the similarity of Shankara's Advaita to Buddhism was brought up chiefly by Shankara's rivals from other Vedanta schools. Yamunacharya, a 10th century AD proponent of the Vishishtadvaita philosophy that opposed Shankara's Advaita, compared Advaita to Buddhism and remarked in his Siddhitraya that for both the Buddhists and the Advaitins, the distinctions of knower, known and knowledge are unreal. The Advaita traces them to Maya, while Buddhist subjectivism traces them to buddhi.[27] Ramanujacharya, another prominent Vishishtadvaita philosopher, accused Shankara of being a Prachanna Bauddha, that is, a hidden Buddhist[28]
John Grimes writes in the Oxford Journal of the American Academy of Religion that while Mahayana Buddhism's influence on Advaita Vedanta has been ignored for most of its history, scholars now see it as undeniable.[29] Along similar lines, Eliot Deutsch and Rohit Dalvi state in their 2004 book The Essential Vedanta:
Many authors are of the opinion that the similarities in Advaita and certain aspects of Buddhism were due to the Upanishadic influence on both streams. For instance, Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, an important intellectual figure of 20th century India, wrote in his book Indian Philosophy:
In the same vein, C.D Sharma, in his A Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy, states:
S. Mudgal noted that among some traditionalist Indian scholars, it was the accepted view that Shankara "adopted practically all ... dialectic (of the Buddhists), their methodology, their arguments and analysis, their concepts, their terminologies and even their philosophy of the Absolute, gave all of them a Vedantic appearance, and demolished Buddhism... Sankara embraced Buddhism, but it was a fatal embrace".[32] Mudgal himself, however, believes that the Advaita according to Shankara is a synthesis of two independent and opposing streams of thought, the Upanishadic and the Buddhist, representing the orthodox and the heterodox respectively.[33]
In modern India, spiritual gurus following the tradition of Advaita Vedanta have generally been enthusiastic in their praise of the Buddha. Swami Vivekananda of the monastic Ramakrishna Mission, a leading figure in the late 19th century religious scene in India, spoke highly of the Buddha[34] and the similarities between Advaita and Buddhist thought.[35] Ravi Shankar, a popular spiritual figure who considers himself as an Advaita Vedantin, has said that he believes Advaita and Buddhism are two ways of looking at the same reality.[36]
Advaita rejuvenated much of Hindu thought and also spurred debate with the two main theistic schools of Vedanta philosophy that were formalized later: Vishishtadvaita (qualified nondualism), and Dvaita (dualism). Advaita further helped to merge the old Vedic religion with popular south-Asian cults/deities, thus making a bridge between higher types of practice (such as jnana yoga) and devotional religion of simple householders.
Swami Vivekananda gave a talk on "The absolute and manifestation" at London in 1896. In it he said, "I may make bold to say that the only religion which agrees with, and even goes a little further than modern researchers, both on physical and moral lines is the Advaita, and that is why it appeals to modern scientists so much. They find that the old dualistic theories are not enough for them, do not satisfy their necessities. A man must have not only faith, but intellectual faith too".[37]
Advaita Vedānta, like other Vedanta schools of Hindu philosophy, recognises the following three texts (known collectively as the Prasthānatrayī) of the Hindu tradition: Vedas- especially the Upanishads, Bhagavad Gita and Brahma Sutras. Many advaitin authors, including Adi Shankara, have written Bhashyas (commentaries) on these texts. These texts are thus considered to be the basic texts of the advaita tradition.
Other texts include, Advaita Siddhi,[38] written by Madhusudana Saraswati, Shankara Digvijaya — historical record of Adi Shankara's life accepted by scholars worldwide, Avadhuta Gita and Ashtavakra Gita. Among modern texts, Jnana yoga by Swami Vivekananda, and the Collected Works of Sri Aurobindo, with The Life Divine being the most prominent, deal with Advaita Vedanta.
Advaita Vedanta has had many teachers over the centuries in India and other countries.
|
||||||||||||||||||||