Advaita Vedanta

Advaita Advaita Vedanta edanta “Advai “Advaita” ta” redirec redirects ts here. here. For For other other uses, seeAdv see Advaita aita (dis- pada[9] in the 8th century, who systematised the works of ambiguation).. ambiguation) preceding philosophers.[10] Its teachings have influenced [note 1] Advaita Vedanta is the oldest extant sub-school extant  sub-school various sects of Hinduism.[11] The key source texts for all schools of Vedānta are the Prasthanatrayi the  Prasthanatrayi,, the canonical texts consisting of the Upanishads,, the Bhagavad Upanishads the  Bhagavad Gita and Gita  and the Brahma the  Brahma Sutras, Sutras, of which they give a philosophical interpretation and elucidation.[6] Advaita Vedanta developed in a multi-faceted religious and philosophical philosophical landscape. The tradition developed developed in interaction with the other traditions of India:   Jainism, Jainism, Buddhism,,  Vaishnavism and Shaivism Buddhism and  Shaivism,, as well as the other schools of Vedanta. In mo mode dern rn time times, s, due due to west wester ernn   Orientalism and Perennialism,, and its influence on Indian Neo-Vedanta Perennialism Indian  Neo-Vedanta [12] and Hindu and Hindu nationalism, nationalism, Advaita Vedanta has acquired a broad acceptance in Indian culture and beyond as the paradigmatic example of Hindu spirituality,[12] despite the wide popularity of the Shaivite the  Shaivite Vishishtadvaita and Vishishtadvaita  and Dvaitadvaita bhakti traditions, bhakti  traditions, and incorporating teachers such as Ramana as Ramana Maharshi and Maharshi and Nisargadatta  Nisargadatta Maharaj despite their eclectic and tantric backgrounds.

Statue of  Gaudapada ,  Gaudapada , the grand guru of  Adi  Adi Shankara and Shankara  and the  first historical proponent proponent of Advaita Advaita Vedanta, Vedanta, also believed to be the founder of  Shri  Shri Gaudapadacharya Math

1 Moksha – lib liberation thro hrough knowledge of Brahman

of Vedanta of Vedanta,,[note 2] an ancient Hindu tradition of scriptural exegesis [note 3] and religious and religious practice, practice,[web 1] and the bestknown school of advaita, the nonduality of  Atman  and Brahman  or the Absolute. It gives “a unifying interpretationofthewholebodyofUpanishads”,[6] providing providing scriptural authority for the postulation of the nonduality of  Atman and   Brahman . Advaita (not-two in Sanskrit Sanskrit)) ref refersto ers to the the recog recognit nitio ionn that that the true Self, Atman Self, Atman,, is the same as the highest Reality, Brahman..  [note 4] [note 5] Followers seek liberation/release Brahman seek liberation/release by acquiring vidyā acquiring vidyā (knowledge)  (knowledge)[8] of the identity of Atman and Brahman. Attaining Attaining this liberation takes takes a long preparation and training under the guidance of a guru. Adva Advaititaa thou though ghtt canal can also so be foun oundd in non non-or -orth thodo odoxx India Indiann religious traditions, such as the tantric Nath tantric  Nath tradition.  tradition. The principal principal,, though though not the first, expone exponent nt of the Advaita Vedanta-interpretation was Shankara was Shankara Bhagavad-

Main article: Moksha article:  Moksha Traditi Traditional onal Advai Advaita ta Vedant Vedantaa cen centers ters around around the study study and correct understanding of the  sruti , revealed texts, especially the Upanishads. [13][14] Correct understanding provides knowledge knowledge of the identity of atman of atman and  and Brahman  Brahman,, which results in liberation in  liberation.. The main main texts texts to be studstudied are the Upanishads the  Upanishads,,  Bhagavad Gita and Gita  and Brahma  Brahma Sutras.. Correct tras Correct knowledg knowledgee is obtained obtained by follo following wing the four stages of samanyasa  (self-cultivation), sravana, listening to the teachings of the sages,  manana, reflection on the teachings, and  svādhyāya, contemplation of the truth “that art Thou”. Practice Practice is also needed to “destroy one’s tendencies (vAasanA-s) tendencies (vAasanA-s)"" before real insight can be attained. [web 2] 1

2

1 MOKSHA MOKSHA – LIBERATION LIBERATION THROUGH THROUGH KNOWLEDGE KNOWLEDGE OF BRAHMAN 

1.1   Svādhyāya and  - understand- remo remove ved, d, the the truth truth of “Brahm “Brahmaa Satya Satyam m Jagan Jagan Mith Mithya ya Jivo Jivo Svādhyāya and anubhava  anubhava [web 5] Brahmaiva Brahmaiva Na Aparah” is realised: ing the texts Sruti , revealed texts, and proper reasoning, are the main sources of knowledge for Shankara and the subsequent Advaita Vedanta tradition.[15][16] Correct knowledge of Brahman can be acquired acquired by svādhyāya ,[17] study of the self and of the Veda, and  nididhyāsana, prolonged study of and conte contempl mplati ation on on the truth truthss reve reveal aled ed in the sruti [18] and contemplation of non-duality.[19] Nididhyasana   lead leadss to   anubhava, direc directt cogni cognitition on or understa understandin nding, g, which which establish establishes es the truth of the sruti .[20] Shankara   anubhava Shankara holds  holds  to be a  pramana, an inde indepen pende dent nt sourc sourcee of knowl knowled edge ge which which is propro[21] vide videdd by   nididhyasana . Acco Accordi rding ng to Comans Comans,, Shankara uses anubhava interchangeably with pratipatta, “understanding”.[web 3] Davis Davis translate translatess   anubhava as “direct intuitive intuitive understanding”. understanding”.[22] According to Hirst, anubhava  is the “non-dual realisation gained from the scriptures”, which “provides the sanctionp and paradigm for for proper proper reasonin reasoning”, g”, when interpre interpreted ted by a self-reali self-realized zed Advaitin teacher.[23] This “knowledge of Brahman, is identical with that self which is to be known as witness, not as object”.[23] Modern interpretators have recast anubhava  as “personal  as “personal experience”,, in line with Unitarian and Theosophical experience” influences.[24] Yet,   anubhava   does not center around some sort of “mystical experience,” but around the correct knowledge of Brahman.[16] Anantanand Rambachan quotes several modern interpretators in defence of this interpretation, interpretation, especially especially Radakrishnan, Radakrishnan,[24] but nevertheless makes clear that   sruti   is the main source of knowle knowledge dge for Shankara. Shankara.[15] Swami Swami Dayanan Dayananda da notes notes that that anubhava  has a more specific meaning than its conventional meaning of “experience”, namely “direct knowledge”. Dayananda Dayananda explains explains that interpreting interpreting anubahva as “experience” may lead to a misunderstanding of Advaita Vedanta, and a mistaken rejection of the study of the scriptures as mere intellectual understanding. Stressing the meaning of  anubhava  as knowledge, Saraswati argues that liberation comes from knowledge, not from mere experience.[web 3] Saraswati Saraswati points out that “the experienc periencee of the self self ... can never never come because because consciousness is ever-present, in and through each and every experience.”[web 4] And Swami Nikhalananda notes that (knowledge of) Atman and Brahman can only be reached by buddhi , “reason,”[25] stati stating ng that that mysti mystici cism sm is a kind kind of intuitive knowledge, while buddhi  is  is the highest means of [26] attaining knowledge.

1.2 Moksha Moksha - liberat liberation ion

Brahman (the Absolute) is alone real; this world is unreal; the Jiva or the individual soul is non-different from Brahman.[web 5] Liberation can be achieved while living, and is called Jivanmukta.[29]

1.3 Identi Identity ty of of Atman Atman and Brahman Brahman Seealso Jnana , Prajna and Pra and Prajñānam jñānam Brahma

Moksha is attained by realizing the identity of Atman and Brahman. According According to Potter, 8. The The true Self Self is itse itself lf just just that pure pure consciousness, without which nothing can be known in any way. 9. And that that same same true true Self, Self, pure pure consc conscio ioususness, is not different from the ultimate world Principle, Principle, Brahman ... 11. ... Brahma Brahmann (=the (=the true true Self, Self, pure conconsciousness) is the only Reality (sat ),), since It is untinged by difference, the mark of ignorance, and since It is the one thing that is not sublimatable.[30] “Pure consciousness” is the translation of  jnanam.[31] Altho Althoug ughh the the commo commonn trans transla latition on of   jnanam[31] is “consciousness”, the term has a broader meaning of “knowing"; “becoming acquainted with”,[web 6] “knowledge about anything”,[web 6] “awareness”,[web 6] “higher knowledge”.[web 6] “Brahman” too has a broader meaning than “pure consciousness”. According to Paul Deussen,[7] Brahman is: •

•

•

  Satyam, “the true reality, which, however, is not the empirical one   Jñãnam, “Knowledge which, however, is not split into the subject and the object”   anantam, “boundless or infinite”

According to David Loy, The knowledge knowledge of Brahman ... is not intuition of  Brahman   Brahman but itself is Brahman.[32]

The same nuance can be found in   satcitananda, satcitananda, the quali qualitities es of Brahma Brahman, n, which which are usual usually ly trans translat lated ed [note 6] [33] Correct Correctkno knowle wledge dgeof of Brahman Brahman results resultsin inliberation liberation,, as “Eternal “Eternal Bliss Bliss Conscio Consciousn usness” ess”,, “Absolute “Absolute Bliss [web 7] by knowledge of the identity of  atman and Brahman and  Brahman.. Consciousness”, or “Consisting of existence and [web 8] knowledge of Brahman destroys Brahman  destroys Maya, the illusory ap- thought thought and joy”. joy”. Satcita Satcitananda nandais is composed composed of three three preances which cover the Real, Brahman. When Maya is Sanskrit Sanskrit words:  words:

2

1 MOKSHA MOKSHA – LIBERATION LIBERATION THROUGH THROUGH KNOWLEDGE KNOWLEDGE OF BRAHMAN 

1.1   Svādhyāya and  - understand- remo remove ved, d, the the truth truth of “Brahm “Brahmaa Satya Satyam m Jagan Jagan Mith Mithya ya Jivo Jivo Svādhyāya and anubhava  anubhava [web 5] Brahmaiva Brahmaiva Na Aparah” is realised: ing the texts Sruti , revealed texts, and proper reasoning, are the main sources of knowledge for Shankara and the subsequent Advaita Vedanta tradition.[15][16] Correct knowledge of Brahman can be acquired acquired by svādhyāya ,[17] study of the self and of the Veda, and  nididhyāsana, prolonged study of and conte contempl mplati ation on on the truth truthss reve reveal aled ed in the sruti [18] and contemplation of non-duality.[19] Nididhyasana   lead leadss to   anubhava, direc directt cogni cognitition on or understa understandin nding, g, which which establish establishes es the truth of the sruti .[20] Shankara   anubhava Shankara holds  holds  to be a  pramana, an inde indepen pende dent nt sourc sourcee of knowl knowled edge ge which which is propro[21] vide videdd by   nididhyasana . Acco Accordi rding ng to Comans Comans,, Shankara uses anubhava interchangeably with pratipatta, “understanding”.[web 3] Davis Davis translate translatess   anubhava as “direct intuitive intuitive understanding”. understanding”.[22] According to Hirst, anubhava  is the “non-dual realisation gained from the scriptures”, which “provides the sanctionp and paradigm for for proper proper reasonin reasoning”, g”, when interpre interpreted ted by a self-reali self-realized zed Advaitin teacher.[23] This “knowledge of Brahman, is identical with that self which is to be known as witness, not as object”.[23] Modern interpretators have recast anubhava  as “personal  as “personal experience”,, in line with Unitarian and Theosophical experience” influences.[24] Yet,   anubhava   does not center around some sort of “mystical experience,” but around the correct knowledge of Brahman.[16] Anantanand Rambachan quotes several modern interpretators in defence of this interpretation, interpretation, especially especially Radakrishnan, Radakrishnan,[24] but nevertheless makes clear that   sruti   is the main source of knowle knowledge dge for Shankara. Shankara.[15] Swami Swami Dayanan Dayananda da notes notes that that anubhava  has a more specific meaning than its conventional meaning of “experience”, namely “direct knowledge”. Dayananda Dayananda explains explains that interpreting interpreting anubahva as “experience” may lead to a misunderstanding of Advaita Vedanta, and a mistaken rejection of the study of the scriptures as mere intellectual understanding. Stressing the meaning of  anubhava  as knowledge, Saraswati argues that liberation comes from knowledge, not from mere experience.[web 3] Saraswati Saraswati points out that “the experienc periencee of the self self ... can never never come because because consciousness is ever-present, in and through each and every experience.”[web 4] And Swami Nikhalananda notes that (knowledge of) Atman and Brahman can only be reached by buddhi , “reason,”[25] stati stating ng that that mysti mystici cism sm is a kind kind of intuitive knowledge, while buddhi  is  is the highest means of [26] attaining knowledge.

1.2 Moksha Moksha - liberat liberation ion

Brahman (the Absolute) is alone real; this world is unreal; the Jiva or the individual soul is non-different from Brahman.[web 5] Liberation can be achieved while living, and is called Jivanmukta.[29]

1.3 Identi Identity ty of of Atman Atman and Brahman Brahman Seealso Jnana , Prajna and Pra and Prajñānam jñānam Brahma

Moksha is attained by realizing the identity of Atman and Brahman. According According to Potter, 8. The The true Self Self is itse itself lf just just that pure pure consciousness, without which nothing can be known in any way. 9. And that that same same true true Self, Self, pure pure consc conscio ioususness, is not different from the ultimate world Principle, Principle, Brahman ... 11. ... Brahma Brahmann (=the (=the true true Self, Self, pure conconsciousness) is the only Reality (sat ),), since It is untinged by difference, the mark of ignorance, and since It is the one thing that is not sublimatable.[30] “Pure consciousness” is the translation of  jnanam.[31] Altho Althoug ughh the the commo commonn trans transla latition on of   jnanam[31] is “consciousness”, the term has a broader meaning of “knowing"; “becoming acquainted with”,[web 6] “knowledge about anything”,[web 6] “awareness”,[web 6] “higher knowledge”.[web 6] “Brahman” too has a broader meaning than “pure consciousness”. According to Paul Deussen,[7] Brahman is: •

•

•

  Satyam, “the true reality, which, however, is not the empirical one   Jñãnam, “Knowledge which, however, is not split into the subject and the object”   anantam, “boundless or infinite”

According to David Loy, The knowledge knowledge of Brahman ... is not intuition of  Brahman   Brahman but itself is Brahman.[32]

The same nuance can be found in   satcitananda, satcitananda, the quali qualitities es of Brahma Brahman, n, which which are usual usually ly trans translat lated ed [note 6] [33] Correct Correctkno knowle wledge dgeof of Brahman Brahman results resultsin inliberation liberation,, as “Eternal “Eternal Bliss Bliss Conscio Consciousn usness” ess”,, “Absolute “Absolute Bliss [web 7] by knowledge of the identity of  atman and Brahman and  Brahman.. Consciousness”, or “Consisting of existence and [web 8] knowledge of Brahman destroys Brahman  destroys Maya, the illusory ap- thought thought and joy”. joy”. Satcita Satcitananda nandais is composed composed of three three preances which cover the Real, Brahman. When Maya is Sanskrit Sanskrit words:  words:

3

1.5 Stages Stages and practices practices •

•

sat  सत्   सत् (present (present participl participlee); [Sanskrit root  as , "to [note be"]: “Truth”, 7] “Absolute Being”,[web 7] “a palpable force of virtue and truth”.[34] Sat   describes an essence that is pure and timeless, that never changes.[web 7]

•

•

cit  िचत्   िचत् (noun (noun):): “consciousness”, “consciousness”,[web 7] “true conscio scious usne ness” ss”,, “to be consc conscio iousn usnes esss of”, of”,[35] “to [35] [35] understand”, “to comprehend”.

Ihām hāmutr utrārtha tha

phala hala

bhoga hoga

virāga āga

(इहाऽमु त् रार्थ फल भोगिव भोगिव िवरा रागम् राग म् ) — The renunciation (virāga) of enjoyments of objects (artha phala bhoga ) in this world (iha) and the other worlds (amutra ) like heaven etc. (शमािद िद षट् ट् क   क  Śamā Śamādi di ṣatk ṣatkaa samp sampat atti  ti    (शमा  सम् पत् ित) — the sixfold sixfold qualities, qualities,   Śama (control of the antahkaraṇa).[web 16]   Dama  (the control of external sense organs).  Uparati  (the   (the cessation of these external organs so restrained, from the pursuit of objec objects ts other other than than that, that, or it may may mean mean the abandonment of the prescribed works according to scriptural injunctions).[note 12]  Titikṣa (the tolerating of tāpatraya of tāpatraya).).  Śraddhā (the faith in Guru in Guru and  and Vedas  Vedas).).  Samādhāna   (the (the conc concentr entratin atingg of the mind on God and Guru).  Mumukṣutva (मु मु  (मु मु क् षु त् वम्) — The firm conviction that the nature of the world is misery and the intense longing for  moksha (release  from  from the cycle of births and deaths ). • •

•   ānanda  आनन्  द (noun): “bliss”,[web 7] “true bliss”, [web “happiness”, 9] “joy”,[web 9] “delight”,[web 9] “pleasure”[web 9]

•

This knowledge is intuitive knowledge, a spontaneous type of knowing[36][note 8] , as rendered in the prefix  pra of prajnanam Brahman .

• • •

1.4 Mahavaky Mahavakyaa – The Great Sentences Sentences •

Main article: Mahāvākyas article:  Mahāvākyas The Mahavakya, or “the great sentences”, remind us of the unity of Brahman and Atman, or “the inner immortal self self and and the the grea greatt cosm cosmic ic powe powerr are are one one and and the the same same”. ”.[37] There are many such sentences in the Vedas, however only one such sentence from each of the four Vedas is usually chosen.

1.5 Stages Stages and practic practices es

•

  Sravana, listening to the teachings of the sages on

the  the   Upanishads and Upanishads  and Advaita Vedanta, and studying the Vedantic texts, such as the Brahma the  Brahma Sutras. Sutras. In this stage the student learns about the reality of Brahman and Brahman  and the identity of atman;

•

of reflection on the teachings; teachings;  Manana, the stage of reflection

  Nididhyāsana, the stage of meditation on the truth Advaita Vedanta gives an elaborate path to attain mok“that art Thou”.[web 15][web 17] sha. It entails more than self-inquiry or bare insight into one’s real nature. Practice, especially Jnana Yoga, is also 1.5.2 Samadh Samadhii needed to “destroy one’s tendencies (vAasanA-s) tendencies (vAasanA-s)"" before 1.5.2 real insight can be attained.[web 2][note 11] While While Shankara Shankara emphasi emphasized zedsravana sravana (“hearing”), manana (“reflection”) (“reflection”) and nididhyasana and nididhyasana (“repeated  (“repeated meditation”), meditation”),   Dŗg-Dŗśya-Viveka later texts like the  (14th century) cen tury) 1.5.1 Jnana Yoga – Four Four stages stages of practice practice and  Vedantasara (of Sadananda)  (15th century) added samadhi as a means to liberation, a theme that was also Main article: Jnana article:  Jnana Yoga emphasized by Swami Vivekananda. •

Classical Advaita Vedanta emphasises the path of Jnana Bhakti Yoga Yoga and Karma Yoga Yoga Yoga, oga, a progr progress essio ionn of study study and traini training ng to attai attainn 1.5.3 Bhakti [43][web 15] moksha.. It consists of four stages: moksha Main articles: Bhakti articles:  Bhakti and  and Karma  Karma yoga s,[44] the “fourfold disci  Samanyasa or   Sampatti s, pline” (sādhana-catustaya), cultivating the follow- Bhakti Yoga and Karma Yoga can be employed as subsidiary practices to the understanding of the  sruti . In ing four qualities:[43][web 15] Bhakti Yoga, practice centres on the worship God in any   Nityānitya vastu viveka  (िनत् यािनत् य वस् तु way and in any form, like Krishna like  Krishna or Ayyappa or  Ayyappa.. Adi  िववे कम्) — The ability (viveka) to correctly Shankara himself was a proponent of devotional worship discriminate between the eternal ( nitya) sub- or Bhakti . But Adi Shankara taught that while Vedic sacstance (Brahman ) and the substance that is rifices,  puja  and devotional worship can lead one in the transitory existence (anitya). directi direction on of jnana (true knowle knowledge dge), ), they they cannot cannot lead lead one •

•

4 directly to  moksha. At best, they can serve as means to obtain moksha via shukla gati. Karma yoga is the way of doing our duties, in disregard of personal gains or losses.[note 13]

1.6 Necessity of a Guru See also: Guru-shishya tradition According to Śankara and others, anyone seeking to attain moksha must do so under the guidance of a  Guru (teacher ).[note 14] It is the teacher who through exegesis of Sruti and skilful handling of words generates a hitherto unknown knowledge in the disciple. The teacher does not merely provide stimulus or suggestion.[45] The Guru must have the following qualities: [note 15]

2 TEXTS 

2. The Bhagavad Gita , known as Sādhana prasthāna (practical text), (part of Smṛti ) 3. The  Brahma Sutras, known as  Nyāya prasthāna or   Yukti prasthana   (part of   darśana of   Uttarā Mīmāṃsā) The Upanishads consist of twelve or thirteen major texts, with many minor texts. The Bhagavad Gītā is part of the Mahabhārata. The Brahma Sūtras (also known as the Vedānta Sūtras), systematise the doctrines taught in the Upanishads and the Gītā. Sankara Bhagavadpāda has written Bhāshyas  (commentaries) on the Prasthānatrayī. These texts are thus considered to be the basic texts of the Advaita-parampara.

2.2 Textual authority

1. Śrotriya — must be learned in the Vedic scriptures The order of precedance regarding authority of Vedic and Sampradaya Scriptures is as follows, 2. Brahmaniṣṭhā — literally meaning 'established in Brahman'; must have realised the oneness of Brah  Śruti, literally “hearing, listening”, are the sacred man in everything, and in himself/herself. texts comprising the central canon of Hinduism and is one of the three main sources of  dharma and The seeker must serve the Guru, and submit questions therefore is also influential within Hindu Law.[46] with all humility in order to remove all doubts (see Bhagavad Gita  4.34). By doing so, Advaita says, the   Smṛti, literally “that which is remembered (or seeker will attain Moksha ('liberation from the cycle of recollected)", refers to a specific body of   Hindu births and deaths’). scripture, and is a codified component of Hindu customary law. Post Vedic scriptures such as Ramayana, Mahabharata and traditions of the rules on dharma  such as Manu Smriti, Yaagnyavalkya 2 Texts Smriti etc. Smrti also denotes tradition in the sense that it portrays the traditions of the rules on dharma, See also: Works of Adi Shankara especially those of lawful virtuous persons.) •

•

Advaita Vedanta is based on the inquiry into the sacred texts of the Upanishads, Bhagavad Gita and Brahma Sutras. Adi Shankara gave a systematisation and philosophical underpinning of this inquiry in his commentaries. The subsequent Advaita-tradition has further elaborated on these sruti and commentaries.

•

scriptures notably consisting of narratives of the history of the universe from creation to destruction, genealogies of kings, heroes, sages, and demigods, and descriptions of Hindu cosmology, philosophy, and geography.[web 19]

•

 Śiṣṭāchāra, literally“that which is followed bygood

(in recent times)".

2.1 Prasthānatrayī – Three standards Main article: Prasthanatrayi

  Purāṇa, literally “of ancient times”, are post-vedic

•

  Atmatuṣṭi, literally “that which satisfies oneself (or

self validation)", according to which one has to decide whether or not to do with  bona fide. Initially this was not considered in the order of precedence but Manu and Yājñavalkya considered it as last one.

Adi Sankara has chosen three standards, called Prasthānatrayī , literally,  three points of departure (three standards) . Later these were referred to as the three canonical texts of reference of Hindu philosophy by other Vedanta If anyone of them contradicts the preceding one, then it schools. is disqualified as an authority to judge. There is a well known Indian saying that Smṛti follows Śruti. So it was They are: considered that in order to establish any Theistic Philo1. The   Upanishads, known as  Upadesha prasthāna sophical theory (Astika Siddhanta) one ought not contra(injunctive texts), (part of Śruti ) dict Śruti (Vedas).

5

2.3 Siddhi-granthas

3 Philosophy

Additionallythere are four Siddhi-granthas thatare taught Main article: Hindu philosophy in the Advaita-parampara, after study of the Prasthanatrayi: The Advaita Vedanta gives an explanation and interpretation of the sacred texts of the Upanishads, Bhagavad Gita 1. Brahmasiddhi by Mandana Mishra (750–850), and Brahma Sutras. Adi Shankara's commentaries have 2. Naishkarmasiddhi by Sureswara (8th century, disci- become central texts in the Advaita Vedanta tradition, but are not the only interpretations available or accepted in ple of Sankara), this tradition. 3. Ishtasiddhi by Vimuktananda (1200), 4. Advaita Siddhi,[web 20] written by   Madhusudana 3.1 Ontology – The nature of being Saraswati - 1565-1665. See also:   Substance ontology,   Substance theory and substance ontology 2.4 Introductory texts Introductory texts from the Advaita Vedanta tradition in- Ontology is the philosophicalstudy of thenatureof being , existence, or reality, as well as the basic categories of beclude: ing and their relations.  Ashtavakra Samhita (pre-Sankara), with traces of Advaita Vedanta is a so-called substance ontology, an onAdvaitism.[note 16] tology “which holds that underlying the seeming change, variety, and multiplicity of existence there are unchangTattvabodha (Shankara), an introductory text ing and permanent entities (the so-called substances)".[47] explaining the terminologies used in Advaita In contrast, Buddhism is a process ontology, according to Vedanta.[note 17] which “there exists nothing permanent and unchanging, within or without man”.[48][note 20]  Atma bodha,  A Treatise on the knowledge of Atma (Shankara).[note 18] •

•

•

•

 Vedantasara (of Sadananda) (Bhagavad Ramanuja, 3.1.1 Three Levels of Reality 1017 to 1137 A.D.[web 27] )[note 19] See also: Two truths doctrine  Vakyavrtti Advaita tookover from the Madhyamika the idea of levels   Laghu-Vakyavrtti of reality.[50] Usually two levels are being mentioned, [51] but Shankara uses sublation as the criterion to postulate   Dŗg-Dŗśya-Viveka an ontological hierarchy of three levels: [52][web 32]   Panchikaranam

•

 Vedanta-Paribhasha (of Dharmaraja Adhvarindra)

•

 Advaita-Makaranda (of Lakshmidhara Kavi)

•

  Aparoksha-Anubhuti

•

 Dakshinamurthy Stotram

•

•

•

•

•

  Panchadasi (of Vidyaranya)

•

  Kaupina-pancakam

•

  Sadhana-panchakam

•

  Manisha-pancakam

•

  Dasasloki

•

 Advaita Bodha Deepika

•

•

•

 Pāramārthika (paramartha, absolute), the absolute level, “which is absolutely real and into which both other reality levels can be resolved”.[web 32] This experience can't be sublated by any other experience.[52]  Vyāvahārika (vyavahara), or samvriti-saya[51] (empirical or pragmatical), “our world of experience, the phenomenal world that we handle every day when we are awake”.[web 32] It is the level in which both  jiva  (living creatures or individual souls) and Iswara are true; here, the material world is also true. Prāthibhāsika (pratibhasika, apparent reality, unreality), “reality based on imagination alone”. [web 32] It is the level in which appearances are actually false, like the illusion of a snake over a rope, or a dream.

6

3 PHILOSOPHY 

3.1.2 Absolute Reality

3.1.3 Empirical reality

Brahman Main articles: Brahman and Nirguna Brah- Māyā Main article: Māyā

man

According to Adi Shankara, Māyā (/mɑːjɑː/) is the comBrahman is Paramarthika Satyam , “Absolute Truth”.[53] plex illusionary power of Brahman which causes the It is Brahman to be seen as the material world of separate forms. Its shelter is Brahman, but Brahman itself is unthe true Self, pure consciousness ... the touched by the illusion of  Māyā, just as a magician is not only Reality (sat ), since It is untinged by diftricked by his own magic. ference, the mark of ignorance, and since It is All sense data entering ones awareness via the five senses the one thing that is not sublatable”. [30] are Māyā. Māyā is neither completely real nor completely unreal, hence indescribable.   Māyā  is temporary and is “Brahman” has a broader meaning than “pure conscious- transcended with “true knowledge”, or perception of the ness”. According to Paul Deussen,[7] Brahman is: more fundamental reality which permeates Māyā.   Satyam, “the true reality, which, however, is not the Māyā has two main functions: empirical one” 1. To “hide” Brahman from ordinary human percep  Jñãnam, “Knowledge which, however, is not split tion, into the subject and the object” •

•

•

  anantam, “boundless or infinite”

Other than  Brahman, everything else, including the universe, material objects and individuals, are maya. Brahman is absolute reality, unborn and unchanging. According to Advaita Vedanta, consciousness is not a property of Brahman but its very nature. In this respect Advaita Vedanta differs from other Vedanta schools.[web 33] Brahman is the Self-existent, the Absolute and the Imperishable. Brahman is indescribable. It is at best Satchidananda, Infinite Truth, Infinite Consciousness and Infinite Bliss. 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. Brahman isoften described asneti neti,“notthis,notthis” since  Brahman  cannot be correctly described as this or that. Atman Main article: Ātman (Hinduism)

Ātman (IAST: ātman, Sanskrit: आत् मन्) is a Sanskrit word that means 'self'. Ātman is the first principle,[54] the  true  self of an individual beyond identification with phenomena, the essence of an individual. "Ātman” (Atma, आत् मा, आत् मन्) is a Sanskrit word which means“essence, breath, soul.”It is related to ProtoIndo-European *etmen, a root found in Sanskrit and German and which means “breath”, and in Ancient Greek ἀτμός, atmòs “vapor”, like in atmosphere.[55][note 21]

2. To present the material world in its (Brahmam) place. The world is unreal and real The world is both unreal

and real. but something can't be both true and false at the same time; hence Adi Shankara has classified the world as indescribable. Adi Sankara says that the world is not real (true), it is an illusion.[web 34][note 22] Adi Sankara also claims that the world is notabsolutelyunreal (false). It appears unreal (false) only when compared to Brahman. At the empirical or pragmatic level, the world is completely real.[56][note 23] The world being both unreal and real is explained by the following. 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. 3.1.4 Avidyā Ignorance Due to ignorance (avidyā), Brahman is per-

ceived as the material world and its objects (nama rupa vikara). According to Shankara, Brahman is in reality attributeless and formless. Brahman, the highest truth and all (reality), does not really change; it is only our ignorance that gives the appearance of change. Also due to avidyā, the true identity is forgotten, and material reality, which manifests at various levels, is mistaken as the only and true reality. The notion of avidyā and its relationship to Brahman creates a crucial philosophical issue within Advaita Vedanta thought: how can avidyā appear in Brahman, since Brahman is pure consciousness?[57]

7

3.2 Epistemology – Ways of knowing

Avasthåtraya – Three states of consciousness See

also: Sarira (Vedanta)

Adi Shankara discerned three states of consciousness, based on the   Mandukya Upanishad, namely waking (jågrat), dreaming (svapna), and deep sleep (suƒupti),[web 36][web 37] which correspond to the   three bodies,[60] another formulation of the five koshas:

The swan is an important motif in Advaita. It symbolises two things: first, the swan is called  hamsah in Sanskrit (which becomes  hamso  if the first letter in the next word is /h/). Upon repeating this  hamso indefinitely, it becomes  so-aham , meaning, “I am That”. Second, just as a swan lives in water but its feathers are not soiled by water, similarly a liberated Advaitin lives in this world full of maya but is untouched by its illusion.

Sengaku Mayeda writes, in his commentary and translation of Adi Shankara's Upadesasahasri: Certainly the most crucial problem which Sankara left for his followers is that of avidyā. If the concept is logically analysed, it would lead the Vedanta philosophy toward dualism or nihilism and uproot its fundamental position.[58]

1. The first state is the waking state, in which we are aware of our daily world. “It is described as outward-knowing (bahish-prajnya), gross (sthula) and universal (vaishvanara)".[web 37] This is the gross body. 2. The second state is the dreaming mind. “It is described as inward-knowing (antah-prajnya), subtle (pravivikta) and burning (taijasa)".[web 37] This is the subtle body. 3. The third state is the state of deep sleep. In this state the underlying ground of concsiousness is undistracted, “the Lord of all (sarv'-eshvara), the knower of all (sarva-jnya), the inner controller (antar-yami), the source of all (yonih sarvasya), the origin and dissolution of created things (prabhav'-apyayau hi bhutanam)".[web 37] This is the causal body.

Turiya, pure consciousness is the background that underlies and transcends the three common states of consciousness.[web 38][web 39] In this consciousness both absolute and relative,   Saguna Brahman and   Nirguna Brahman, are transcended.[61] It is the true state of Subsequent Advaitins gave somewhat various explana- experience of the infinite (ananta) and non-different tions, from which various Advaita schools arose. (advaita/abheda), free from the dualistic experience which results from the attempts to conceptualise ( vipalka) reality.[62] It is the state in which ajativada, nonKoshas See also: Kosha origination, is apprehended.[62] Due to avidya, atman is covered by sheaths, or bodies, which hide man’s true nature. According to the Taittiriya 3.2 Epistemology – Ways of knowing Upanishad, the Atman is covered by five koshas, usually rendered “sheath”.[web 35] They are often visualised like See also: Epistemology thelayersofanonion.[59] Fromgrosstofinethefivesheets are: Epistemology (from Greek   ἐπιστήμη (epistēmē), meaning “knowledge, understanding”, and   λόγος (logos), 1. Annamaya kosha, food-apparent-sheath meaning “study of”) is the branch of philosophy concerned with the nature and scope (limitations) of 2. Pranamaya kosha, air-apparent-sheath knowledge. 3. Manomaya kosha, mind-stuff-apparent-sheath 4. Vijnanamaya kosha, wisdom-apparent-sheath 5. Anandamaya (Ananda)

kosha,

3.2.1 Pramāṇas – Correct knowledge

bliss-apparent-sheath Main article: Pramana

Pramāna , (sources of knowledge, Sanskrit प् रमाण), refers According to Vedanta the wise man should discriminate to the correct knowledge, arrived at by thorough reasonbetween the self and the koshas, which are non-self. ing, of any object.

8

4 HISTORY OF ADVAITA VEDANTA

Pramātṛ, Pramāṇa and Prameya   Pramāṇa forms Sublation is replacement of a “truth” by a higher “truth”,

one part of a tripuṭi (trio), namely,

1. Pramātṛ, the subject; the knower of the knowledge 2. Pramāṇa, the cause or the means of the knowledge 3. Prameya, the object of knowledge Six pramāṇas In Advaita Vedānta,[63] as in the Bhāṭṭa

school of Mimāṃsā, the following pramāṇas are accepted:

1.  Pratyakṣa  (perception), the knowledge gained by meansof thesenses. That which is immediatelyperceived to be so; This knowledge can be corrected, e.g., if one perceives a piece of rope to be a snake.

until no higher truth can be found. Shankara uses sublatibility as the criterion for the ontological status of any content of consciousness:[64] Sublition is essentially the mental process of correcting and rectifying errors of judgement. Thus one is said to sublate a previous heldjudgment when, in the light of a new experience which contradicts it, one either regards the judgment as false or disvalues it in some significant sense ... Not only judgment but also concepts, objects, relations, and in general any content of consciousness can be sublated.[65]

4 History of Advaita Vedanta

2.  Anumāna   (inference), the knowledge gained by means of inference. That which is perceived as true through previous knowledge, e.g., to knows that it is a fire because smoke can be seen in the sky (the two are related through a universal law) 3.   Śabda (verbal testimony), the knowledge gained by means of texts such as Vedas (also known as Āptavākya, Śabda pramāṇa) 4.  Upamāna  (comparison), the knowledge gained by means of analogy or comparison. That which is perceived as true since it compares to previous, confirmed, knowledge. To know that something is something, e.g., a cat, because one has seen cats before. 5.  Arthāpatti (postulation), the knowledge gained by superimposing the known knowledge on an appearing knowledge that does not concur with the known knowledge. i.e., To see someone gain weight while knowing they are fasting, imposes the knowledge that the person is secretly eating. 6.  Anupaladbhi   (negation), the knowledge gained through the absence of the object. That which is true through a negation. Classic e.g., karatale ghato nasti  – the pot is not on the palm. The pot could be Adi Shankara with Disciples , by Raja Ravi Varma (1904) elsewhere. So the place (on the palm) of its absence is also important. Advaita Vedanta existed prior to Shankara, but found its most influential expounder in Shankara.[66] Perception, inference and verbal testimony have the same meaning as in the Nyaya-school. Regarding comparison, postulation and non-cognition Advaita Vedanta views 4.1 Pre-Shankara Vedanta which somewhat differ from the Nyaya-school.[63] Of the Vedanta-school before the composition of the Brahma Sutras   (400–450 CE[67] ) almost nothing is known.[67] Verylittle also is known of the period between 3.2.2 Criterion of sublation the Brahmansutras andShankara(firsthalf of the8th cenSee also: Aufheben tury CE).[67] Only two writings of this period have survived: the  Vākyapadīya, written by Bhartṛhari (second

9

4.2 Gaudapada

half 5th century[68] ), and the   Māndūkya-kārikā  written by Gaudapada (7th century CE).[67] 4.1.1 Earliest Vedanta

See also: Vedas, Upanishads and Darsanas The Upanishads form the basic texts, of which Vedanta gives an interpretation.[69] The Upanishads don't contain “a rigorous philosophical inquiry identifying the doctrines and formulating the supporting arguments”. [70][note 24] This philosophical inquiry was performed by the  darsanas, the various philosophical schools.[72] Deutsch and Dalvi point out that in the Indian context texts “are only part of a tradition which is preserved in its purest form in the oral transmission as it has been going on.”[73] The Upanishads originated in the Sramana movements, renunciate ascetic traditions which gave birth to Yoga,[74] Jainism, Buddhism,[75] and some nāstika schools of Hinduism such as Cārvāka and Ājīvika, and also popular concepts in all major Indian religions such as  saṃsāra (the cycle of birth and death) and  moksha   (liberation from that cycle).[76][note 25] The various traditions interacted with each other, and cannot be seen as completely separate developments.[77] Buddhism, favored and supported by merchants and royals,[78] developed elaborate philosophical and pedagogical texts and systems early in itshistory. Early in thefirstmillennium Madhyamaka and Yogacara developed ideas about the two levels of truth and the working of the mind[79] to which the developing Vedanta-tradition responded, but also incorporated these systems.[3] Buddhist influence can also be found in the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali, written c. 4th century CE.[80][81] 4.1.2 Bādarāyana’s Brahma Sutras

Main article: Brahma Sutras The Brahma Sutras of Bādarāyana, also called the Vedanta Sutra,[82] were compiled in its present form around 400–450 CE,[83] but “the great part of the  Sutra must have been in existence much earlier than that”. [83] Estimates of the date of Bādarāyana’s lifetime differ between 200 BCE and 200 CE.[84] The Brahma Sutra is a critical study of the teachings of the Upanishads. It was and is a guide-book for the great teachers of the Vedantic systems. [82] Bādarāyana was not the first person to systematise the teachings of the Upanishads.[85] He refers to seven Vedantic teachers before him:[85] From the way in which Bādarāyana cites the views of others it is obvious that the teach-

ings of the Upanishads must have been analyzed and interpretedby quite a few beforehim and that his systematization of them in 555 sutras arranged in four chapters must have been the last attempt, most probably the best. [85] 4.1.3 Between BrahmaSutras and Shankara

According to Nakamura, “there must have been an enormous number of other writings turned out in this period, but unfortunately all of them have been scattered or lost and have not come down to us today”.[67] In his commentaries, Shankara mentions 99 different predecessors of his Sampradaya.[4] In the beginning of his commentary on the Brhadaranyaka Upanishad Shankara salutes the teachers of the Brahmavidya Sampradaya.[web 40] PreShankara doctrines andsayings can be tracedin theworks of the later schools, which does give insight into the development of early Vedanta philosophy.[67] The names of various important early Vedanta thinkers have been listed in the   Siddhitraya   by Yamunācārya (c.1050), the Vedārthasamgraha  by Rāmānuja (c.1050– 1157), and the Yatīndramatadīpikā by Śrīnivāsa-dāsa.[67] Combined together,[67] at least fourteen thinkers are known to have existed between the composition of the Brahman Sutras and Shankara’s lifetime.[67][note 26] Although Shankara is often considered to be the founder of the Advaita Vedanta school, according to Nakamura, comparison of the known teachings of these early Vedantins and Shankara’s thought shows that most of the characteristics of Shankara’s thought “were advocated by someone before Śankara”.[86] Shankara “was the person who synthesized the  Advaita-vāda  which had previously existed before him”.[86] In this synthesis, he was the rejuvenator and defender of ancient learning.[87] He was an unequalled commentator,[87] due to whose efforts and contributions the Advaita Vedanta assumed a dominant position within Indian philosophy.[87]

4.2 Gaudapada Main article: Gaudapada Gaudapada (6th century)[88] was the teacher of Govinda Bhagavatpada and the grandteacher of Shankara. 4.2.1 Māṇḍukya Kārikā

Gaudapada wrote or compiled[89] the Māṇḍukya Kārikā, also known as the Gauḍapāda Kārikā and as the Āgama Śāstra.[note 27] The Māṇḍukya Kārikā is a commentary in verseformonthe MandukyaUpanishad , oneoftheshortest but most profound Upanishads, or mystical Vedas, consisting of just 13 prose sentences. In Shankara’s time it was considered to be a Śruti, but not particularly

10 important.[90] In later periods it acquired a higher status, and eventually it was regarded as expressing the essence of the Upanisad philosophy.[90] The Māṇḍukya Kārikā is the earliest extent systematic treatise on Advaita Vedānta,[91] though it is not the oldest work to present Advaita views, [9] nor the only preSankara work with the same type of teachings. [9]

4 HISTORY OF ADVAITA VEDANTA

According to Gaudapada, the Absolute is not subject to birth, change and death. The Absolute is  aja, the unborn eternal.[109] The empirical world of appearances is considered unreal, and not absolutely existent.[109] 4.2.3 Shri Gaudapadacharya Math

Main article: Shri Gaudapadacharya Math 4.2.2 Buddhist influences

According to B.N.K. Sharma, the early commentators on the Brahma Sutras were all   realists,[92] or pantheist realists.[93] During the same period, the 2nd5th century CE, there was a great idealist revival in Buddhism, which countered the criticisms of the Hindu realists.[94] The works of Buddhist thinkers like Nagasena,   Buddhaghosa and  Nagarjuna, all of them Brahmin converts to Buddhism,[94] “created a great sensation and compelled admiration all around”.[94] Other Brahmins, faithful to Brahminism but equally impressed by these developments in Buddhist thought, looked for and found in some portions of the Upanishads “many striking approaches to the metaphysical idealism of the Buddhists”.[94] Duringthe 5th and6th centuries there was a further development of Buddhist thought with the development of the Yogacara school.[95] It was   Gaudapada   who further bridged Buddhism and Vedanta.[95] He took over the Buddhist doctrines that   ultimate reality is pure consciousness (vijñaptimātra)[88][note 28] and “that the nature of the world is the four-cornered negation”.[88][note 29] Gaudapada “wove [both doctrines] into a philosophy of the  Mandukaya Upanisad , which was further developed by Shankara”.[99][note 30] At the same time, Gaudapada emphatically rejected the epistemic idealism of the Buddhists, arguing that there was a difference between objects seen in dreams and real objects in the world, although both were ultimately unreal. He also rejected the pluralism and momentariness of consciousnesses, which were core doctrines of the Vijnanavada school, and their techniques for achieving liberation.[101] Gaudapada also took over the Buddhist conceptof“ajāta” from   Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka   philosophy,[102][103] which uses the term “anutpāda”.[104] [note 31] “Ajātivāda”, “the Doctrine of no-origination”[109][note 32] or noncreation, is the fundamental philosophical doctrine of Gaudapada.[109] Richard King has noted that Ajativada has a radically different meaning in the context of respectively Vedanta and Buddhism. Buddhist writers take Ajativada to imply that there are no essences in factors, and therefore change is possible. Gaudapada made the opposite interpretation, advocating the absolutist position that origination and cessation were unreal, the only Ultimate reality (Brahman) being unoriginated and unchanging.[110]

Around 740 AD Gaudapada founded Shri Gaudapadacharya Math[note 33] , also known as Kavaḷē maṭha. It is located in Kavale, Ponda, Goa,[web 44] and is the oldest matha of the South Indian Saraswat Brahmins.[111][web 45] Unlike other mathas, Shri Gaudapadacharya matha is not a polemical center established to influence the faith of all Hindus, its jurisdiction is limited to only Dakshinatya Saraswat Brahmins.

4.3 Adi Shankara Main article: Adi Shankara Adi Shankara (788–820), also known as Śaṅkara Bhagavatpādācārya and Ādi Śaṅkarācārya, synthesised and rejuvenated the doctrine of Advaita.[87] It was Shankara who succeeded in reading Gaudapada’s mayavada[112][note 34] into Badarayana’s  Brahma Sutras , “and give it a   locus classicus ",[112] against the realistic strain of the  Brahma Sutras .[112][note 35][note 36] His interpretation, including works ascribed to him, has become the normative interpretation of Advaita Vedanta.[114][112] 4.3.1 Historical context

See also Late-Classical Age and  Hinduism Middle Ages

Shankara lived in the time of the so-called “Late classical Hinduism”,[115] which lasted from 650 till 1100 CE.[115][note 37] After the end of the Gupta Empire and the collapse of the Harsha Empire, power became decentralised in India. Rural and devotional movements arose, along with   Shaivism,   Vaisnavism,   Bhakti and Tantra.[125] Buddhism, which was supported by the ancient Indian urban civilisation lost influence to the traditional religions,[125] but at the same time, was incorporated into Hinduism, when Gaudapada used Buddhist philosophy to reinterpret the Upanishads.[126] 4.3.2 Philosophical system

This also marked a shift from Atman and Brahman as a “living substance”[127] to “maya-vada”[note 34] , where Atman and Brahman are seen as “pure knowledgeconsciousness”.[128] Shankara systematised the works of

11

4.4 Sureśvara and Maṇḍana Miśra

preceding philosophers,[10] marking this turn from realism to idealism.[112][127] Shankara’s synthesis of Advaita Vedanta is summarised in this quote from the Vivekacūḍāmaṇi, one of his Prakaraṇa graṃthas (philosophical treatises):[note 38] In half a couplet I state, what has been stated by scores of texts; that is Brahman alone is real, the world is mithyā (not independently existent), and the individual self is nondifferent from Brahman.[129][note 39] According to Sringeri Math, Shankara’s message can be summarised even shorter: The eternal, impersonal, consciousness Absolute is the Brahman, the one without a second.[web 50] 4.3.3 Writings

Main article: Adi Shankara bibliography Adi Shankara’s main works are his commentaries on the Prasthana Trayi, which consist of the  Brahma Sūtras , Bhagavad Gītā and the Upanishads. According to Nakamura, Shankara’s Brahma-sūtra-bhāsya , his commentary on the Brahma Sūtra, is “the most authoritative and best known work in the Vedānta philosophy”.[130] Shankara also wrote a major independent treatise, called "Upadeśa Sāhasrī ", expounding his philosophy. The authenticity of the "Vivekachudamani", a well-known work ascribed to Shankara, is doubtful,[131][132][133] though it is “so closely interwoven into the spiritual heritage of Shankara that any analysis of his perspective which fails to consider [this work] would be incomplete”.[131][note 40] The authorship of Shankara of his Mandukya Upanishad Bhasya  and his supplementary commentary on Gaudapada’s Māṇḍukya Kārikā  is also disputed.[134][note 41] 4.3.4 Influence of Shankara

Shankara has an unparallelled status in the tradition of Advaita Vedanta. He provided an orthodox hermeneutical basis for heterodox Buddhist phenomology,[139][112] and has been called the "St. Thomas Aquinas of Indian thought”[140] and“the most brilliantpersonality in the history of Indian thought.”[141] His teachings and tradition form the basis of Smartism and have influenced Sant Matlineages.[142] He introduced the Pañcāyatana form of worship, the simultaneous worship of five deities - Ganesha, Surya, Vishnu, Shiva and

Devi. Shankara explained that all deities were but different forms of the one Brahman, the invisible Supreme Being.[143] Yet, according to Richard E. King, Although it is common to find Western scholars and Hindus arguing that Sankaracarya was the most influential and important figure in the history of Hindu intellectual thought, this does not seem to be justified by the historical evidence.[144] According to King and Roodurnum, until the 10th century Sankara was overshadowed by his older contemporary Mandana-Misra. In the centuries after Sankara it was Maṇḍana Miśra who was considered to be the most important representative of Vedanta,[145][146] and in the later medieaval period his teachings were overshadowed by Visista-Advaita.[147] Prior to Shankara, views similar to his already existed, but did not occupy a dominant position within the Vedanta,[148] being restricted to a select elite. The early Vedanta scholars were from the upper classes of society, well-educated in traditional culture. They formed a social elite, “sharply distinguished from the general practitioners and theologians of Hinduism.”[149] Their teachings were “transmitted among a small number of selected intellectuals”. [149] Works of the early Vedanta schools do not contain references to Vishnu or Shiva.[150] It was only after Shankara that “the theologians of the various sects of Hinduism utilized Vedanta philosophy to a greater or lesser degree to form the basis of their doctrines,”[11] for example the Nath-tradition, [151] whereby “its theoretical influence upon the whole of Indian society became final and definitive.”  [149]

4.4 Sureśvara and Maṇḍana Miśra Main articles: Sureśvara and Maṇḍana Miśra Sureśvara (fl. 800-900 CE)[152] and Maṇḍana Miśra were contemporaries of Shankara, Sureśvara often (incorrectly) being identified with Maṇḍana Miśra.[153] Both explained Sankara “on the basis of their personal convictions.”[153] Sureśvara has also been credited as the founder of a pre-Shankara branch of Advaita Vedanta.[152] Maṇḍana Miśra was a Mimamsa scholar and a follower of Kumarila, but who also wrote a work on Advaita, the Brahma-siddhi .[154] According to tradition, Maṇḍana Miśra andhis wife were defeatedbyShankara in a debate, where-after he became a follower of Shankara.[154] Yet, his attitude toward Shankara is that of a “self-confident rival teacher of Advaita,”[155] and his influence was such, that some regard this work to have “set forth a nonSankaran brand of Advaita.”[154] The “theory of error”

12

4 HISTORY OF ADVAITA VEDANTA

set forth in the  Brahma-siddhi  became the normative Advaita Vedanta theory of error.[156] It was Vachaspati Misra’s commentary on this work which linked it up with Shankara’s teaching.[157] Hiriyanna and Kuppuswami Sastra have pointed out that Sureśvara and Maṇḍana Miśra had differentviews on various doctrinal points:[158] •

•

 The locus of   avidya:[158] according to Maṇḍana Miśra, the individual  jiva  is the locus of   avidya, whereas Suresvara contents that   avidya   regarding Brahman is located in Brahman.[158] These two different stances are also reflected in the opposing positions of the Bhamati school and the Vivarana school.[158] Liberation: according to Maṇḍana Miśra, the knowledge which arises from the Mahavakya is insufficient for liberation. Only the direct realization of Brahma is liberating, which can only be attained by meditation.[159] According to Suresvara, this knowledge is directly liberating, while meditation is at best a useful aid.[155][note 42]

4.5 Advaita Vedanta sub-schools After Shankara’s death several subschools developed. Two of them still exist today, the  Bhāmatī   and the Vivarana.[web 51][4] Perished schools are the Pancapadika and  Istasiddhi , which were replaced by Prakasatman’s Vivarana-school. [161] These schools worked outthe logical implications of various Advaita doctrines. Two of the problems they encountered were the further interpretations to the concepts of māyā and avidya.[web 51]

Advaita System through his Bhamati.” [164] Only two works are known of Vachaspati Misra, the Brahmatattvasamiksa  on Maṇḍana Miśra’s  Brahma-siddhi , and his Bhamati onthe Sankara-bhasya, Shankara’s commentary on the Brahma-sutras.[157] The name of the Bhamatisubschool is derived from this   Bhamati .[web 51][web 52] According to legend, Misra’s commentary was named after his wife to praise her, since he neglected her during the writing of his commentary.[web 52] The Bhamati-school takes an ontological approach. It sees the Jiva as the source of avidya.[web 51] It sees meditation as the main factor in the acquirement of liberation, while the study of the Vedas and reflection are additional factors.[165] 4.5.3 Prakasatman - Vivarana school

Main article: Vivarana Prakasatman (c.1200-1300)[161] wrote the PancapadikaVivarana, a commentary on the   Pancapadika by Padmapadacharya.[161] The  Vivarana  lends its name to the subsequent school. According to Roodurmum, “his line of thought [...] became the leitmotif of all subsequent developments in the evolution of the Advaita tradition.” [161] The Vivarana-school takes an epistemological approach. Prakasatman was the first to propound the theory of mulavidya or  maya  as being of “positive beginningless nature”,[166] and sees Brahman as the source of avidya. Critics object that Brahman is pure consciousness, so it can't be the source of avidya. Another problem is that contradictory qualities, namelyknowledge and ignorance, are attributed to Brahman.[web 51] 4.5.4 Vimuktatman - Ista-Siddhi

4.5.1 Padmapada - Pancapadika school

Padmapada  (c. 800 CE)[162] was a direct disciple of Shankara, who wrote the  Pancapadika, a commentary on the   Sankara-bhaya.[162] Padmapada diverted from Shankara in his description of avidya, designating prakrti  as avidya or ajnana.[163] 4.5.2 Vachaspati Misra - Bhamati school

Vimuktatman (c.1200 CE)[167] wrote the Ista-siddhi .[167] It is one of the four traditional   siddhi , together withMandana’s Brahma-siddhi , Suresvara’s Naiskarmyasiddhi , and Madusudana’s   Advaita-siddhi .[168] According to Vimuktatman, absolute reality is “pure intuitive consciousness.”[169] His school of thought was eventually replaced by Prakasatman’s Vivarana school.[161]

4.6 later Advaita Vedanta tradition

Main articles: Bhamati and Vācaspati Miśra

See also:  Dashanami Sampradaya and List of teachers Vachaspati Misra (c.800-900 CE)[164] wrote the of Advaita Vedanta Brahmatattva-samiksa, a commentary on Maṇḍana Miśra’s  Brahma-siddhi , which provides the link be- According to Sangeetha Menon, prominent names in the tween Mandana Misra and Shankara,[157] attempting later Advaita tradition are:[web 53] to harmonise Sankara’s thought with that of  Mandana Misra.[web 51] According to Advaita tradition, Shankara   Prakāsātman, Vimuktātman, Sarvajñātman (tenth reincarnated as Vachaspati Misra “to popularise the century), •

13

5.2 Smarta Tradition •

 Śrī Harṣa, Citsukha (twelfth century),

•

 ānandagiri, Amalānandā (thirteenth century),

•

 Vidyāraņya, Śaṅkarānandā (fourteenth century),

•

 Sadānandā (fifteenth century),

•

 Prakāṣānanda, Nṛsiṁhāśrama (sixteenth century),

•

•

•

Madhusūdhana Sarasvati, Dharmarāja Advarindra, Appaya Dīkśita (seventeenth century),  Sadaśiva Brahmendra (eighteenth century), Candraśekhara Bhārati (twentieth century), Sacchidānandendra Saraswati (twentieth century).

Contemporary teachers are the orthodox Jagadguru of Sringeri Sharada Peetham; the more traditional teachers Sivananda Saraswati   (1887–1963),   Chinmayananda Saraswati,[web 54] and   Dayananda Saraswati (Arsha Vidya);[web 54] and less traditional teachers like Narayana Guru.[web 54]

5 Sampradaya 5.1 Advaita Mathas See also: Dashanami Sampradaya Advaita Vedanta is, at least in the west, primarily known

Shankara, himself considered to be an incarnation of Shiva,[web 1] established the Dashanami Sampradaya, organizing a section of the Ekadandi monks under an umbrella grouping of ten names.[web 1] Several other Hindu monastic and Ekadandi traditions remained outside the organisation of the Dasanāmis.[170][171][172] Adi Sankara is said to have organised the Hindu monks of these ten sects or names under four Maṭhas (Sanskrit:  मठ ) (monasteries), with the headquarters at Dvārakā in the West, Jagannatha Puri in the East,  Sringeri in the South and Badrikashrama in the North.[web 1] Each math was headed by one of his four main disciples, who each continues the Vedanta Sampradaya.[note 43] Monks of these ten orders differ in part in their beliefs and practices, and a section of them is not considered to be restricted to specific changes made by Shankara. While the dasanāmis associated with the Sankara maths follow the procedures enumerated by Adi Śankara, some of these orders remained partly or fully independent in their belief and practices; and outside the official control of the Sankara maths. The advaita sampradaya is not a Saiva sect,[web 1][175] despite the historical links with Shaivism. [note 44] Nevertheless, contemporary Sankaracaryas have more influence among Saiva communities than among Vaisnava communities.[web 1] The greatest influence of the gurus of the advaita tradition has been among followers of the Smartha Tradition, who integrate the domestic Vedic ritual with devotional aspects of Hinduism.[web 1] According to Nakamura, these mathas contributed to the influence of Shankara, which was “due to institutional factors”.[10] The mathas which he built exist until today, and preserve the teachings and influence of Shankara, “while the writings of other scholars before him came to be forgotten with the passage of time”.[176] The table below gives an overview of the four  Amnaya Mathas founded by Adi Shankara, and their details.[web 55] According to the tradition in Kerala, after Sankara’s samadhi   at Vadakkunnathan Temple, his disciples founded four mathas in Thrissur, namely Naduvil Madhom, Thekke Madhom, Idayil Madhom and Vadakke Madhom.

5.2 Smarta Tradition (Vidyashankara temple) at  Sringeri Sharada Peetham , Shringeri  Main article: Smarta Tradition

as a philosophical system. But it is also a tradition of Shankara is regarded as the greatest renunciation. Philosophy and renunciation are closely Traditionally, [177][178] teacher andreformer of the Smartha.[179][178] Acrelated:[web 1] cording to Alf Hiltebeitel, Shankara established the nondualist interpretation of the Upanishads as the touchstone Most of the notable authors in the advaita of a revived smarta tradition: tradition were members of the sannyasa tradition, and both sides of the tradition share the Practically, Shankara fostered a rapproche[web 1] same values, attitudes and metaphysics. ment between Advaita and  smarta  orthodoxy,

14

6 INFLUENCE ON MODERN HINDUISM 

which by his time had not only continued to defend the varnasramadharma theory as defining the path of karman, but had developed the practice of pancayatanapuja (“five-shrine worship”) as a solution to varied and conflicting devotional practices. Thus one could worship any one of five deities (Vishnu, Siva, Durga, Surya, Ganesa) as one’s  istadevata  (“deity of choice”).[180] The Sringeri monastery is still the centre of the Smarta sect.[177][178] In recent times bhakti cults have increasingly become popular with the smartas,[181] and Shiva is particularly favored.[177] In modern times Smarta-views have been highly influential in both the Indian [web 56] and western[web 57] understanding of Hinduism via NeoVedanta. Vivekananda was an advocate of Smartaviews,[web 57] and Radhakrishnan was himself a SmartaBrahman.[182][183][note 45]

6 Influence on modern Hinduism 6.1 Unifying Hinduism Main article: Unifying Hinduism Advaita Vedanta came to occupy a central position in the classification of various Hindu traditions. With the onset of Islamic rule, hierarchical classifications of the various orthodox schoolswere developed to defend Hinduism against Islamic influences.[184] According to Nicholson, already between the twelfth and the sixteenth century, ... certain thinkers began to treat as a single whole the diverse philosophical teachings of the Upanishads, epics, Puranas, and the schools known retrospectively as the “six systems” (saddarsana) of mainstream Hindu philosophy.[185] The tendency of “a blurring of philosophical distinctions” has also been noted by Burley. [186] Lorenzen locates the origins of a distinct Hindu identity in the interaction between Muslims and Hindus,[187] and a process of “mutual self-definition with a contrasting Muslim other”,[188] which started well before 1800. [189] Both the Indian andthe European thinkers who developedthe term “Hinduism” in the 19th century were influenced by these philosophers. [185] Within these socalled  doxologies  Advaita Vedanta was given the highest position, since it was regarded to be most inclusive system.[184] Vijnanabhiksu, a 16th-century philosopher and writer, is still an influential representant of these doxologies. He’s been a prime influence on 19th century Hindu modernists like Vivekananda, who also

tried to integrate various strands of Hindu thought, taking Advaita Vedanta as its most representative specimen. [184]

6.2 Contemporary popularization 6.2.1 Indian nationalism and Hindu Universalism

Main articles:   Hindu nationalism and   Hindu reform movements With the onset of the British Raj, the colonialisation of India bythe British, there also started a Hindu renaissance in the 19th century, which profoundly changedthe understandingofHinduisminbothIndiaandthewest.[12] Western orientalist searched for the “essence” of the Indian religions, discerning this in the Vedas,[190] and meanwhile creating the notion of “Hinduism” as a unified body of religious praxis[191] and the popular picture of 'mystical India'.[191][12] This idea of a Vedic essence was taken over by the Hindu reformers, together with the ideas of Universalism and Perennialism, the idea that all religions share a common mystic ground.[192] The Brahmo Samaj, who was supported for a while by the Unitarian Church,[193] played an essential role in the introduction and spread of this new understanding of Hinduism.[194] Vedanta came to be regarded as the essence of Hinduism, and Advaita Vedanta came to be regarded as “then paradigmatic example of the mystical natureof the Hindu religion”.[195] These notions served well for the Hindu nationalists, who further popularised this notion of Advaita Vedanta as the pinnacle of Indian religions. [196] It “provided an opportunity for the construction of a nationalist ideology that could unite HIndus in their struggle against colonial oppression”.[197] 6.2.2 Vivekananda

Main articles:   Neo-Vedanta, Swami Vivekananda and Ramakrishna Mission A major proponent in the popularisation of this Universalist and Perennialist interpretation of Advaita Vedanta was Vivekananda,[198] who played a major role in the revival of Hinduism,[199] and the spread of Advaita Vedanta to the west via the Ramakrishna Mission. His interpretation of Advaita Vedanta has been called “NeoVedanta”.[200] Vivekananda discerned a universal religion, regarding all the apparent differences between various traditions as various manifestations of one truth.[201] He presented karma, bhakti, jnana and raja yoga as equal means to attain moksha,[202] to present Vedanta as a liberal and universal religion, in contrast to the exclusivism of other religions.[202] Vivekananda emphasised samadhi as a means to attain liberation. [203] Yet this emphasis is not to be found in

15 the Upanishads nor with Shankara.[204] For Shankara, meditation and Nirvikalpa Samadhi are means to gain knowledge of the already existing unity of Brahman and Atman,[203] not the highest goal itself: [Y]oga is a meditative exercise of withdrawal from the particular and identification with the universal, leading to contemplation of oneself as the most universal, namely, Consciousness. This approach is different from the classical Yoga of complete thought suppression.[203]

which he saw as grounded in and supported by the absolute or Brahman.[web 59][note 46] Radhakrishnan also reinterpreted Shankara’s notion of maya. According to Radhakrishnan, maya is not a strict absolute idealism, but “a subjective misperception of the world as ultimately real.”[web 59] 6.2.4 Neo-Advaita

Main article: Neo-Advaita

Neo-Advaita  is a New Religious Movement based on a Advaita Vedanta He also claimed that Advaita is the only religion that is in popularised, western interpretation of [207] and the teachings of Ramana Maharshi. Neo-Advaita total agreement with modern science. In a talk on “The [208][note 47][210][note 48][note 49] for disabsolute and manifestation” given in at London in 1896 is being criticised carding the traditional prerequisites of knowledge of the Swami Vivekananda said, scriptures [211] and “renunciation as necessary preparation for the path of  jnana-yoga".[211][212] Notable neoI may make bold to say that the only reliadvaita teachers are H. W. L. Poonja,[213][207] his stugion which agrees with, and even goes a little dents  Gangaji[214] Andrew Cohen[note 50] , and Eckhart further than modern researchers, both on physTolle.[207] ical 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 6.2.5 Non-dualism enough for them, do not satisfy their necessities. A man must have not only faith, but intelMain article: Nondualism lectual faith too”.[web 58]

Vivekenanda’s modernisation has been criticised: Without calling into question the right of any philosopher to interpret Advaita according to his own understanding of it, ... the process of Westernization has obscured the core of this school of thought. The basic correlation of renunciation and Bliss has been lost sight of in the attempts to underscore the cognitive structure and the realistic structure which according to Samkaracarya should both belong to, and indeed constitute the realm of māyā.[200] 6.2.3 Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan

Main article: Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan further popularized Advaita Vedanta, presenting it as the essence of Hinduism, [web 59] but neglecting the popular bhakti-traditions.[205] Radhakrishnan saw other religions, “including what Radhakrishnan understands as lower forms of Hinduism,”[web 59] as interpretations of Advaita Vedanta, thereby Hindusizing all religions.[web 59] His metaphysics was grounded in Advaita Vedanta, but he reinterpreted Advaita Vedanta for a contemporary understanding.[web 59] He acknowledgedthe reality and diversity of the world of experience,

Advaita Vedanta has gained attention in western spirituality and  New Age, where various traditions are seen as driven by the same non-dual experience. [216] Nonduality points to “a primordial, natural awareness without subject or object”.[web 64] It is also used to refer to   interconnectedness, “the sense that all things are interconnected and not separate, while at the same time all things retain their individuality”.[web 65] Georg Feuersteinisquotedby nonduality-adepts[note 51] as summarizing the Advaita Vedanta-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.”[web 67][note 52]

7 Relationship with other forms of Vedanta The exposition and spread of Advaita by Sankara spurred debate with the two main theistic schools of Vedanta philosophy that were formalised later: Vishishtadvaita (qualified nondualism), and Dvaita (dualism).

16

8 RELATIONSHIP WITH MAHAYANA BUDDHISM 

7.1 Vishishtadvaita Main article: Vishishtadvaita

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”.[227]

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. [217] Ramanujacharya, another prominent Vishishtadvaita philosopher, accused Shankara of being a  Prachanna This influence goes back at least to Gaudapada: Bauddha, that is, a hidden Buddhist[218] Gaudapada rather clearly draws from Buddhist philosophical sources for many of his 7.2 Dvaita arguments and distinctions and even for the forms and imagery in which these arguments Main article: Dvaita are cast.[226] The Dvaita, foundedby Madhvacharya (1238–1317AD), was partisan to Vaishnavism, building on a cogent system of Vedantic interpretation that proceeded to take on Advaita in full measure. Madhvacharya’s student Narayana, in his Madhvavijaya, a hagiography of Madhva, characterised Madhva and Shankara as born-enemies, and describes Shankara as a “demon born on earth”.[219] Surendranath Dasgupta noted that some Madhva mythology went so far as to characterise the followers of Shankara as “tyrannical people who burned down monasteries, destroyed cattle and killed women and children”.[220]

Michael Comans has also demonstrated how Gaudapada, an early Vedantin, utilised some arguments and reasoning from Madhyamaka Buddhist texts by quoting them almost verbatim. However, Comans believes there is a fundamental difference between Buddhist thought andthat of Gaudapada, in that Buddhism has as its philosophical basis the doctrine of Dependent Origination, while Gaudapada does not at all rely on this principle. Gaudapada’s Ajativada is an outcome of reasoning applied to an unchanging nondual reality, the fundamental teaching of the Upanishads. [228]

8 Relationship with Mahayana 8.2 Criticisms In India, the similarity of Shankara’s Advaita to BudBuddhism

dhism was brought up by his rivals from other Vedanta schools, while on the other hand, Mahayanists such as 8.1 Influence of Mahayana Buddhism Bhavyaviveka had to defend themselves from Theravada Buddhistaccusations of the Mahayana doctrine being just Many authorities from India and elsewhere have noted another form of Vedantism.[229][note 53][230] that Advaita Vedanta shows signs of influence from Mahayana Buddhism. The Mahayana schools with Shankara defended himself against these accusations: whom Shankara’s Advaita is said to share similarities are the Madhyamaka, founded by Nagarjuna,[221] Shankara’s criticisms of Buddhism are nevand the Yogacara,[222] founded by Vasubandhu[223] and ertheless powerful and they exhibit clearly Asanga[224] in the early centuries of the Common Era. at least how Shankara saw the difference between Buddhism and his own Vedantic John Grimes writes that while Mahayana Buddhism’s inphilosophy.[226] fluence on Advaita Vedanta has been ignored for most of its history, scholars now see it as undeniable. [225] Eliot Deutsch and Rohit Dalvi state: 8.3 Common core thesis In any event a close relationship between the Mahayana schools and Vedanta did exist with the latter borrowing some of the dialectical techniques, if not the specific doctrines, of the former.[226]

See also: Perennial philosophy Western scholars like N.V. Isaeva state that the Advaita and Buddhist philosophies, after being purified of accidental or historical accretions, can be safely regarded

17 as different expressions of the same eternal absolute truth.[231][note 54] Ninian Smart, a historian of religion, noted that the differences between Shankara and Mahayana doctrines are largely a matter of emphasis and background, rather than essence.[232][note 55]

[5] “Brahman” is not to be confused with Brahma, the Creator and one third of the Trimurti along with Shiva, the Destroyer and Vishnu, the Preserver. [6] Indian philosophy emphasises that “every acceptable philosophy should aid man in realising the Purusarthas, the chief aims of human life: [27] •

9 Status of ethics

  Dharma: the right way to life, the “duties and obligations of the individual toward himself and the society as well as those of the society toward the individual";[28]   Artha: the means to support and sustain one’s life;   Kāma: pleasure and enjoyment;   Mokṣa: liberation, release.

Some claim that there is no place for ethics in Advaita, “that it turns its back on all theoretical and practical considerations of morality and, if not unethical, is at least 'a-ethical' in character”.[233] [7] "Sat  is absolute non changing truth.” –Maharishi Mahesh Ethics does  have a firm place in this philosophy. Ethics, Yogi[web 7] which implies doing good Karma, indirectly helps in Radhakrishnan’s notion of “intuition”. See attaining true knowledge.[234] Many Advaitins consider [8] Compare [web 10][web 11][web 12] Karma a “necessary fiction”. Karma cannot be proven to exist through any of the Pramāṇas. [note 56] However, [9] “Consciousness”,[38][web 13] “intelligence”, [39][40] to encourage students to strive towards Vidyā (spiritual “wisdom”[web 14] knowledge) and combat Avidyā (ignorance), the idea of [10] “the Absolute”,[38][web 13] “infinite”, [web 13] “the Highest Karma is maintained. truth”[web 13] Truth, non-violence, service of others, pity, are Dharma, and lies, violence, cheating, selfishness, greed, are  ad- [11] Puligandla: “Any philosophy worthy of its title should not be a mere intellectual exercise but should have practical harma   (sin). However, no authoritative definition of application in enabling man to live an enlightened life. A Dharma was ever formulated by any of the major expophilosophy which makes no difference to the quality and nents of Advaita Vedanta. Unlike ontological and epistestyle of our life is no philosophy, but an empty intellectual mological claims, there is room for significant disagreeconstruction.” [42] ment between Advaitins on ethical issues. • • •

10 See also •

 Cause and effect in Advaita Vedanta

•

 Kashmir Shaivism

•

 Panpsychism

11 Notes

[12] nivartitānāmeteṣāṁ tadvyatiriktaviṣayebhya uparamaṇamuparatirathavā vihitānāṁ karmaṇāṁ vidhinā  parityāgaḥ[Vedāntasāra, 21]

[13] Sri Swami Sivananda: “Karma Yoga is consecration of all actions and their fruits unto the Lord. Karma Yoga is performance of actions dwelling in union with the Divine, removing attachment andremaining balanced everin success and failure. Karma Yoga is selfless service unto humanity. Karma Yoga is the Yoga of action which purifies the heart and prepares the Antahkarana (the heart and the mind) for the reception of Divine Light or attainment if Knowledge oftheSelf. Theimportant point is that you will have to serve humanity without any attachment or egoism.”[web 18]

[1]   IAST  Advaita Vedānta ;  Sanskrit: अै त वेदात   [əd̪ʋait̪ə [14] Chāndogya Upanishad – ācāryavān puruşoveda. Alsosee ʋeːd̪ɑːnt̪ə], literally, not-two the first prose chapter of Śankara’s Upadeśasāhasrī. [2] Literally:  end or the goal of the Vedas. [15] See Mundaka Upanishad 1.2.12 [3] C.q. Vedic[1][2][3][4] or Hindu philosophy[5]

[16] See also  [web 21]

[4] According to Paul Deussen,[7] Brahman is:

[17] See also  [web 22][web 23]

  Satyam, “the true reality, which, however, is not the [18] See also  [web 24][web 25][web 26] empirical one [19] See also  [web 28][web 29][web 30][web 31][web 27]   Jñãnam, “Knowledge which, however, is not split into the subject and the object” [20] Kalupahana describeshow inBuddhismthereis also a current which favours substance ontology. Kalupahanan sees   anantam, “boundless or infinite” Madhyamaka and Yogacara as reactions against developSee also satcitananda. ments toward substance ontology in Buddhism. [49] •

•

•

18

11 NOTES 

[21] Cognates: Dutch adem, Old High German atum “breath,” [27] Nakamura notes that there are contradictions in doctrine Old English eþian.[55] between the four chapters. [89] [22] Adi Sankara gives the following reasoning: [web 34]

[28] It is often used interchangeably with the term citta-mātra, but they have different meanings. The standard transla Whatever thing remains eternal is true, and whattionof both terms is “consciousness-only”or “mind-only.” ever is non-eternal is untrue. Since the world is creSeveral modern researchers object this translation, and ated and destroyed, it is not real (true). the accompanying label of “absolute idealism” or “idealistic monism”.[96] A better translation for vijñapti-mātra is  Truth is the thing which is unchanging. Since the representation-only.[97] world is changing, it is not real (false). Whatever is independent of space and time is real [29] 1. Something is. 2. It is not. 3. It both is and is not. 4. It (true), and whatever has space and time in itself is neither is nor is not. [web 41][98] not real (false).  Just as one sees dreams in sleep, he sees a kind of [30] The influence of Mahayana Buddhism on other religions and philosophies was not limited to Vedanta. Kalupahana super-dream when he is waking. The world is comnotes that the Visuddhimagga contains “some metaphyspared to this conscious dream. ical speculations, such as those of the Sarvastivadins, the The world is believed to be a superimposition of the Sautrantikas, and even the Yogacarins".[100] Brahman. Superimposition cannot be real (true). [31] “An” means “not”, or “non"; “utpāda” means “genesis”, [23] Shankara gives the following reasoning: [56] “coming forth”, “birth”[web 42] Taken together “anutpāda” means “having no origin”, “not coming into existence”, If the world were unreal (false), then with the liber“not taking effect”, “non-production”.[web 43] TheBuddhist ation of the first living being, the world would have tradition usually uses the term “anutpāda” for the absence been annihilated. However, the world continues to of an origin[102][104] or sunyata.[105] The term is also used exist even if a living being attains liberation. But, it in the Lankavatara Sutra.[106] According to D.T Suzuki, is possible that no living being attained the ultimate “anutpada” is not the opposite of “utpada”, but transcends knowledge (liberation) till now. opposites. It is the seeing into the true nature of exis Adi Sankara believes in  karma, or good actions. tence,[107] the seeing that “all objects are without selfThis is a feature of this world. So the world cansubstance”. [108] not be unreal (false). non-harm;  The Supreme Reality Brahman is the basis of this [32] “A” means “not”, or “non” as in Ahimsa, [109] “jāti” means “creation” or “origination; “vāda” means world. The world is like its reflection. Hence the “doctrine” [109] world cannot be totally unreal (false).  False is something which is ascribed to nonexistent [33]   Sanskrit:  शी सं थान गौडपदाचायर मठ , Śrī Sansthāna Gauḍathings, like Sky-lotus. The world is a logical thing, padācārya Maṭha a fact which is perceived by our senses and exists [34] The term “mayavada” is still being used, in a critical way, but is not the truth. by the Hare Krshnas. See  [web 46] [web 47] [web 48] [web 49] [24] Nevertheless, Balasubramanian argues that since the basic ideas of the Vedanta systems are derived from the Vedas, [35] Nicholson: “The Brahmasutras themselves espouse therealist Parinamavada position, which appears to have been the Vedantic philosophy is as old as the Vedas.[71] the view most common among early Vedantins.” [113] [25] Flood & Olivelle: “The second half of the first millennium BCE was the period that created many of the ide- [36] B.N.K. Sharma: "[H]ow difficult he himself found the task of making the Sutras yield a Monism of his concepological and institutional elements that characterize later tion, is proved by the artificiality and  parenthetical irreleIndian religions. The renouncer tradition played a cenvance of his comments  in many places, where he seeks to tral role during this formative period of Indian religious go against the spirit and letter of the Sutras and their natuhistory....Some of the fundamental values and beliefs that ral drift of arguments and dialectic ... he was fighting with we generally associate with Indian religions in general all his might and ingenuity against a long line of realistic and Hinduism in particular were in part the creation of commentaries.” [112] the renouncer tradition. These include the two pillars of Indian theologies: samsara - the belief that life in this period was the “Golden Age of world is one of suffering and subject to repeated deaths [37] The previous [116] Hinduism” (ca. 320–650 CE[116]), which flourished and births (rebirth); moksa/nirvana - the goal of human during the Gupta Empire[117] (320 to 550 CE) until the existence.....” [76] fall of the Harsha Empire[117] (606 to 647 CE). Prior to [26] Bhartŗhari (c.450–500), Upavarsa (c.450–500), Bodthis “Golden Age” the “classical synthesis” [118] or “Hindu hāyana (c.500), Tanka (Brahmānandin) (c.500–550), synthesis”[119][120] emerged, between 500[119] 200[120] Dravida (c.550), Bhartŗprapañca (c.550), Śabarasvāmin BCE and ca. 300 CE,[119] at the beginning of the “Epic (c.550), Bhartŗmitra (c.550–600), Śrivatsānka (c.600), and Puranic” c.q.   “Preclassical” period. This “classical Sundarapāndya (c.600), Brahmadatta (c.600–700), synthesis” incorporated shramanic[120][121] and Buddhist Gaudapada (c.640–690), Govinda (c.670–720), Maninfluences[120][122] and the emerging  bhakti  tradition into [67] danamiśra (c.670–750). the Brahmanical fold via the smriti  literature.[119][120] This •

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

−

19 synthesis emerged under the pressure of the success of that the world is illusory. Aurobindo, in his The Life Divine, declares thathe has moved fromSankara’s “universal Buddhism and Jainism.[123] During the classical period, power was centralised, along with a growth of far distance illusionism” to his own “universal realism” (2005: 432), trade, standardizarion of legal procedures, and general defined as metaphysical realism in the European philo[117] spread of literacy. Mahayana Buddhism flourished, sophical sense of the term.” [206] but the orthodox Brahmana culture began to be rejuvenated by the patronage of the Gupta Dynasty.[124] The [47] Marek: “Wobei der Begriff Neo-Advaita darauf hinweist, dass sich die traditionelle Advaita von dieser Strömung position of the Brahmans was reinforced, [117] and the first zunehmend distanziert, da sie die Bedeutung der üben[117] Hindu temples emerged during the late Gupta age. den Vorbereitung nach wie vor als unumgänglich ansieht. (The term Neo-Advaita indicating that the traditional Ad[38] The authorship of this work is disputed. Most 20thvaita increasingly distances itself from this movement, as century academic scholars feel it was not authored by they regard preparational practicing still as inevitable) [209] Sankara, and Swami Sacchidanandendra Saraswathi of Holenarsipur concurs. [48] Alan Jacobs: Many firm devotees of Sri Ramana Maharshi now rightlytermthis westernphenomenon as 'Neo[39] slokārdhena pravaksāmi yaduktaṃ granthakotibhih, Advaita'. The term is carefully selected because 'neo' brahma satyaṃ jagat mithyā, jīvo brahmaiva nāparah means 'a new or revived form'. And this new form is not the Classical Advaita which we understand to have [40] Pande comes to the same conclusion: “Vivekachudamani, been taught by both of the Great Self Realised Sages, Adi whetheractually authored by Shankaraor not, is tradition[133] Shankara and Ramana Maharshi. It can even be termed ally held to voice his views authentically”. 'pseudo' because, by presenting the teaching in a highly attenuated form, it might be described as purporting to be [41] Nakamura concludes that Shankara was not the author, [135] Advaita, but not in effect actually being so, in the fullest for several reasons. Shankara understood Buddhist sense of the word. In this watering down of the essenthought, while the author of the commentary shows mis[135] tial truths in a palatable style made acceptable and attracunderstandings of Buddhist thought. The commentive to the contemporary western mind, their teaching is tary uses the terms  vijnapti  and   vjnaptimatra, which is [136] misleading. [210] “a uniquely Buddhist usage”, and does not appear in Shankara’s commentary on the Brahma-sutras. [137] The [49] See for other examples Conway  [web 60] and Swartz  [web 2] two commentaries also quote different Upanishads. [138] Nevertheless, Nakamura also concludes: “Although the [50] Presently cohen has distnced himself from Poonja, and commentary to the Madukya is not actually by sankara, it calls his teachings “Evolutionary Enlightenment”.[215] may be assumed that there is nothing drastically wrong What Is Enlightenment , the magazine published by in using it as a source when discussing early Vedanta Choen’s organisation, has been critical of neo-Advaita philosophy”. [135] several times, as early as 2001. See.[web 61][web 62][web 63] [42] Accordingto both Roodurumand Isaeva, Sureśvara stated [51] Feuerstein’s summary, as given here, is not necessarily representative for Feuerstein’s thought on Advaita. It is that mere knowledge of the identity of Jiva and Brahman quoted on nonduality-websites,[web 66] which is informed is norenoughfor liberation, which requires alsoprolonged by the Perennial philosophy and New Age thinking. It is meditation on this identity.[152][160] also discerneablein Neo-Advaita. The quoteseems to give a subtle reinterpretation, in which the distinction between [43] According to Pandey, these Mathas were not established Real and maya is replaced by a notion of interconnectedby Shankara himself, but were originally ashrams ness or pantheism. The original quote is from Feuerstein’s established by  Vibhāņdaka and his son  Ŗșyaśŗnga.[173] book “The Deeper Dimension of Yoga: Theory and PracShankara inherited the ashrams at Dvārakā and tice”, p. 257–258. It is preceded by the sentence “The Sringeri, and shifted the ashram at Śŗngaverapura esoteric teaching of nonduality – Vedantic Yoga or Jnana to Badarikāśrama, and the ashram at Angadeśa to Yoga – can be summarized as follows”. Jagannātha Purī. [174] [44] Sanskrit.org: “Advaitins are non-sectarian, and they ad- [52] Compare Shankara’s ownwords, from his commentary on theBrahman Sutras: " It is obvious that thesubject and the vocate worship of Siva and Visnu equally with that of object— that is, theSelf (Atman) and theNot-Self, which the other deities of Hinduism, like Sakti, Ganapati and [web 1] are as different as darkness and light are — cannot be others.” identified with each other. It is a mistake to superimpose upon the subject or Self (that is, the “I,” whose nature is [45] According to iskcon.org, “Many Hindus may not strictly consciousness) the characteristics of the object or Not-"I” identify themselvesas Smartas but, by adheringto Advaita (which is non-intelligent), and to superimpose the subject Vedanta as a foundation for non-sectarianism, are indirect [web 56] and its attributes on the object. Nonetheless, man has a followers.” natural tendency, rooted in ignorance (avidya), not to dis[46] Neo-Vedanta seems to be closer to Bhedabheda-Vedanta tinguish clearly between subject and object, although they than to Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta, with the acknowlare in fact absolutely distinct, but rather to superimpose edgement of the reality of the world. Nicholas F. upon each the characteristic nature and attributes of the Gier: “Ramakrsna, Svami Vivekananda, and Aurobindo other. This leads to a confusion of the Real (the Self) and (I also include M.K. Gandhi) have been labeled “neothe Unreal (the Not-Self) and causes us to say such [silly] Vedantists,” a philosophy that rejects the Advaitins’ claim things as “I am that,” “That is mine,” and so on ...[web 68]

20

12 REFERENCES 

[53] King: “In chapter four of his Madhyamakahrdyakarika [21]  Rambachan 1991, p. 14. (on the sravaka-yana), Bhavaviveka puts forward a Sravaka objection to the Mahayana on the grounds that [22]  Davis 2010, p. 40. it is a form of crypto-Vedantism” [23]  Hirst 2005, p. 68. [54] The comparison may or may not stand depending on ones [24]  Rambachan 1991, p. 1-14. stance towards the anatman doctrine laid out in the Buddhist Pali Canon. Some claim that the Pali Canon shows [25]  Nikhalananda 1931, p. viii. that Gautama the Buddha denied the existence of the Atman. However, no single passage in the entire Canon can [26]  Nikhalananda 1931, p. viii-ix. be found to this effect. Gautama only ever identified constituents (the five aggregates) and declared them as “not- [27]  Puligandla 1997, p. 8-9. self”, that is, “this is not my self”. Depending on how [28]  Puligandla 1997, p. 8. Atman is defined and how it is treated in respect to affirmation and denial in philosophical discourse and contem- [29]  Lochtefeld 2002, p. 320. plative practice, the fact that Atman is central to Advaita Vedanta may or may not be compatible with the Buddhist [30]  Potter 2008, p. 6-7. anatman (“not-self”) analysis. [31] Raṅganāthānanda 1991, p. 109. [55] Ninian Smart is a proponent of the so-called “common core thesis”, which states that all forms of mysticism share [32]  Loy 1997, p. 62. a common core. See also  [web 69] and [web 70] [33]  Werner 1994. [56] With the exception of Āgama, though this is contradicted, [34]  Sugirtharajah 2003, p. 115. subtrated, by the Pramāṇas such as Anumāna, Upamāna, or Arthāpatti [35]  Sanskrit Dictionary, chit  [36]  Loy 1997, p. 136.

12 References

[37]  Braue 1984, p. 81.

[1]  Kochumuttom 1999.

[38]  Grimes 1996, p. 234.

[2]   Nakamura.

[39]  Sivaraman 1973, p. 146.

[3]  Raju 1992.

[40]  Braue 1984, p. 80.

[4]  Roodurmum 2002.

[41]  Baue 1984, p. 80.

[5]  Deutsch 1988.

[42]  Puligandla 1997, p. 11.

[6]  Nakamura 1990, p. 112.

[43]  Puligandla 1997, p. 251-254.

[7]  Deussen 1980, p. 232.

[44] Adi Shankara, Tattva bodha (1.2)

[8]  kanamura 2004.

[45]  Rambachan 1994, p. 124-125.

[9]  Nakamura 2004, p. 211.

[46] Coburn, Thomas B. 1984. pp. 439

[10]  Nakamura 2004, p. 680.

[47]  Puligandla 1997, p. 49-50.

[11]  Nakamura 2004, p. 691.

[48]  Puligandla 1997, p. 40-50.

[12]  King 2002.

[49]   Kalupahanan 1994.

[13]  Isaeva 1993, p. 237.

[50]  Renard 2010, p. 130.

[14]  Dalal 2009, p. 16, 26-27.

[51]  Renard 2010, p. 131.

[15]  Rambachan 1984.

[52]  Puligandla 1997, p. 232.

[16]  Dalal & 2009 p22.

[53]  Venkatramaiah 2000, p. xxxii.

[17]  Sivananda 1977, p. viii. [18]  Dalal 2009, p. 16.

[54] Deussen, Paul and Geden, A. S. The Philosophy of the Upanishads. Cosimo Classics (1 June2010). P. 86. ISBN 1-61640-240-7.

[19]  Dalal 2014.

[55]   Atman Etymology Dictionary, Douglas Harper

[20]  Rambachan 1991, p. 5.

[56]  Sinha 1993.

21 [57] Kaplan, Stephen (April 2007). “Vidyā and Avidyā: Si- [90]  Nakamura 2004, p. 280. multaneous and Coterminous?: A Holographic Model to Illuminate the Advaita Debate”. Philosophy East and west . [91]  Sharma 1997, p. 239. 2 57: 178–203. doi:10.1353/pew.2007.0019.   JSTOR [92]  Sharma 2000, p. 60. 4488090. [93]  Sharma 2000, p. 61. [58] Mayeda, Sengaku (1992).  A Thousand Teachings: The Upadesasahasri of Sankara . Albany: State University of [94]  Sharma 2000, p. 62. New York Press. p. 82. [95]  Sharma 2000, p. 63. [59] Belling, Noa (2006).  Yoga for ideal weight and shape . Sydney, Australia: New Holland Publishers (Australia) [96]  Kochumuttom 1999, p. 1. P/L. ISBN 978-1-74110-298-7. [97]  Kochumuttom 1999, p. 5. [60]  Wilber 2000, p. 132. [98]  Garfield 2003. [61]  Sarma 1996, p. 137. [99]  Raju 1992, p. 177-178. [62]  King 1995, p. 300 note 140. [100]  Kalupahana 1994, p. 206. [63]  Puligandla 1997, p. 228. [101]  Sarma 1996, p. 152–154. [64]  Puligandla 1997, p. 231-232. [102]  Renard 2010, p. 157. [65]  Puligandla 1997, p. 231. [103]  Comans 2000, p. 35-36. [66]  Grimes 1990, p. 7. [104]  Bhattacharya 1943, p. 49. [67]  Nakamura 2004, p. 3. [105]  Renard 2010, p. 160. [68]  Nakamura 2004, p. 426. [106]  Suzuki 1999. [69]  Deutsch 2004, p. 95-96. [107]  Suzuki 1999, p. 123-124. [70]   Balasubramanian 2000, p. xxx. [108]  Suzuki 1999, p. 168. [71]   Balasubramanian 2000, p. xxix. [109]  Sarma 1996, p. 127. [72]   Balasubramanian 2000, p. xxx–xxxi. [110]  King 1995, p. 128-130, 140. [73]  Deutsch 2004, p. 95. [111] Shri Gowdapadacharya & Shri Kavale Math (A Commemoration volume). p. 10. [74]  Samuel 2010, p. 8. [75]  Svarghese 2008, p. 259-60.

[112]  Sharma 2000, p. 64.

[76]  Flood & Olivelle 2003, p. 273-274.

[113]  Nicholson 2010, p. 27.

[77]  Samuel 2010.

[114]  Nakamura 2004.

[78]  Samuel 2008.

[115]  Michaels 2004, p. 41-43.

[79]  Kalupahanna 1994.

[116]  Michaels 2004, p. 40-41.

[80]  Werner 1994, p. 27.

[117]  Michaels 2004, p. 40.

[81]  Thurman 1984, p. 34.

[118]  Samuel 2010, p. 193-228.

[82]   Balasubramanian 2000, p. xxxii.

[119]  Hiltebeitel 2002.

[83]  Nakamura 1990, p. 436.

[120]  Larson 2009.

[84]  Pandey 2000, p. 4.

[121]  Fuller 2004, p. 88.

[85]   Balasubramanian 2000, p. xxxiii.

[122]  Cousins 2010.

[86]  Nakamura 2004, p. 678.

[123]  Nath 2001, p. 21.

[87]  Nakamura 2004, p. 679.

[124]  Nakamura 2004, p. 687.

[88]  Raju 1992, p. 177.

[125]  Michaels 2004, p. 42.

[89]  Nakamura 2004, p. 308.

[126]  Scheepers 2000.

22

12 REFERENCES 

[127]  Scheepers 2000, p. 123.

[162]  Roodurmum 2002, p. 38.

[128]  Scheepers 2000, p. 123-124.

[163]  Roodurmum 2002, p. 39.

[129] Shankara, Vivekacūḍāmaṇi

[164]  Roodurmum 2002, p. 34.

[130]  Nakamura 2004, p. 776.

[165]  Roodurmum 2002, p. 37.

[131]  Shah-Kazemi 2006, p. 4.

[166]  Roodurmum 2002, p. 41.

[132]  Singh 2004, p. 1315.

[167]  Dasgupta 1955, p. 198.

[133]  Pande 1994, p. 117-119.

[168]  Dasgupta 1955, p. 198-199.

[134]  Nakamura 2004, p. 262-265.

[169]  Dasgupta 1955, p. 199.

[135]  Nakamura 2004, p. 263.

[170] Karigoudar Ishwaran, Ascetic Culture

[136]  Nakamura 2004, p. 263-264.

[171] Wendy Sinclair-Brull, Female Ascetics

[137]  Nakamura 2004, p. 264.

[172] H.A. Rose, Ibbetson, Denzil Ibbetson Sir, and Maclagan, Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North West Frontier Province, page 857

[138]  Nakamura 2004, p. 265. [139]  Isaeva 1992, p. 240.

[173]  Pandey 2000, p. 4-5. [140]  Benedict Ashley, O.P..  The Way toward Wisdom . p. 395. [174]  Pandey 2000, p. 5. ISBN 0268020280. OCLC 609421317. [141]  Isaeva 1992, p. 2.

[175]  Nakamura 2004, p. 782-783.

[142] Ron Geaves (March 2002). “From Totapuri to Maharaji: [176]  Nakamura 2004, p. 680-681. Reflections on a Lineage (Parampara)". 27th Spalding [177]  Doniger 1999, p. 1017. Symposium on Indian Religions, Oxford. [143] Klaus Klostermaier (2007), A Survey of Hinduism, Third [178]  Popular Prakashan 2000, p. 52. Edition, State University of New York Press, ISBN 978- [179]  Rosen 2006, p. 166. 0791470824, page 40 [180]  Hiltebeitel 2013. [144]  King 2001, p. 128. [181]  Morris 2006, p. 135. [145]  King 2011, p. 128. [182]  Fort 1998, p. 179. [146]  Roodurnum 2002, p. 33-34. [183]  Minor 1987, p. 3. [147]  Isaeva 1992, p. 249. [184]  Nicholson 2010. [148]  Nakamura 2004, p. 690. [149]  Nakamura 2004, p. 693.

[185]  Nicholson 2010, p. 2.

[150]  Nakamura 2004, p. 692.

[186]  Burley 2007, p. 34.

[151]  Feuerstein 1978.

[187]  Lorenzen 2006, p. 24-33.

[152]  Roodurmum 2002, p. 30.

[188]  Lorenzen 2006, p. 27.

[153]  Roodurmum 2002, p. 29.

[189]  Lorenzen 2006, p. 26-27.

[154]  Roodurmum 2002, p. 31.

[190]  King & 2002 118.

[155]  Sharma 1997, p. 291.

[191]  King 1999.

[156]  Roodurmum 2002, p. 32.

[192]  King 2002, p. =119-120.

[157]  Roodurmum 2002, p. 35.

[193]  Jones 2006, p. 114.

[158]  Sharma 1997, p. 290.

[194]  King 2002, p. 123.

[159]  Sharma 1997, p. 290-291.

[195]  King 2002, p. 128.

[160]  Isaeva 1993, p. 241.

[196]  King 2002, p. 129-130.

[161]  Roodurmum 2002, p. 40.

[197]  King 2002, p. 133.

23 [198]  King 2002, p. 135-142. [199]  Dense 1999, p. 191.

[227] S. Mudgal, Advaita of Sankara, A Reappraisal, Impact of  BuddhismandSamkhyaonSankara’sthought , Delhi1975, p.187”

[200]  Mukerji 1983.

[228]  Comans 2000, p. 88–93.

[201]  Rambachan 1994, p. 91-92.

[229] p200. Early Advaita Vedānta and Buddhism: the Mahāyāna context of theGauḍapādīya-kārikā,By Richard King. 1995.

[202]  Rambachan 1994, p. 91. [203]  Comans 1993. [204]  Comans 2000, p. 307. [205]  Flood 1997. [206]  Gier 2013.

[230] V.V Gokhale, trans. and comments. “The Vedanta philosophy described by Bhavya in his Madhyamakahrdaya” Indo-Iranian journal, VOl II, No. 3, 1958, p 179–80 [231] N.V. Isaeva,  Shankara and Indian Philosophy , SUNY Press, 1993. p14

[207]  Lucas 2011.

[232] Ninian Smart,  Doctrine and Argument in Indian Philoso phy. London 1964. p.104

[208]  Marek 2008, p. 10, note 6.

[233]  Deutsch 1969, p. 99.

[209]  Marek 2008, p. 10 note 6.

[234]  Deutsch 1969, p. 100-101.

[210]  Jacobs 2004, p. 82. [211]  Davis 2010, p. 48.

13 Sources

[212]  Yogani 2011, p. 805.

13.1 Published sources

[213]  Caplan 2009, p. 16-17. •

[214]  Lucas 2011, p. 102-105. [215]  Gleig 2011, p. 10.

•

[216]  Katz 2007. [217] J.R.A.S, 1910, p132 [218] See Sri Bhasya of Ramanuja, II.II.27

•

[219] Madhvācārya as Prophetic Witness, by Deepak Sarma. JIRD issue 7 svh 08 15 11 •

[220] Dasgupta Surendranath. A History of Indian Philosophy, vol. 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1922.I, p. 52 [221] Campbell, W. L. Ed. and trans. 1919. The Tree of Wisdom: Being the Tibetan text with English translation of Nāgārjuna’s gnomic verse treatise called the Prajñādanda. Calcutta University. Reprint: Sonam T. Kazi, Gangtok. 1975. [222]  Consciousness in Indian philosophy: the advaita doctrine of 'awareness only', by Sthaneshwar Timalsina, p. 125

•

•

•

[223] P. 34 Journal of theRoyal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, Volume 2001 By Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland [224] Tsoṅ-kha-pa Blo-bzaṅ-grags-pa, Robert A. F. Thurman (Page 28) [225] John Grimes. Journal of the American Academy of Religion Vol. 66, No. 3 (Autumn, 1998), pp. 684–686 [226]  Deutsch 2004, p. 126, 157.

•

•

 Bhatta, Rathnakara (2013),   Shree Shankarayana (May. 2013), pp. 190–380. Balasubramanian, R. (2000), Introduction. In: Chattopadhyana (gen.ed.), “History of Science, Philoso phy and Culture in Indian Civilization. Volume II  Part 2: Advaita Vedanta” , Delhi: Centre for Studies in Civilizations Bhattacharya, Vidhushekhara (1943),   Gauḍapādakārikā , Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Braue, Donald A. (1984), Māyā in Radhakrishnanʾs Thought: Six Meanings Other Than Illusion, Motilall Banarsidass Caplan, Mariana (2009), Eyes Wide Open: Cultivating Discernment on the Spiritual Path, Sounds True  Comans, Michael (1993), The Question of the Im portance of Samadhi in Modern and Classical Advaita Vedanta. In: Philosophy East and West Vol. 43, No. 1 (Jan. 1993), pp. 19–38.  Comans, Michael (2000), The Method of Early Advaita Vedānta: A Study of Gauḍapāda, Śaṅkara, Sureśvara, and Padmapāda, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass  Cousins, L.S. (2010), Buddhism. In: “The Penguin Handbook of the World’s Living Religions” , Penguin  Dalal, Neil (2009), “Contemplative Practice and Textual Agency in Advaita Vedanta ",  Method and Theory in the Study of Religion 21 (2009) 15-27

24 •

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

13 SOURCES 

Dalal, Neil (2014),   “Contemplative Grammars: Śaṅkara’s Distinction of Upāsana and Nididhyāsana”,   Journal of Indian Philosophy, doi:10.1007/s10781-014-9258-z Dasgupta, Surendranath (1955), A history of Indian  philosophy. 5. Southern schools of́ Saivism, Volume 5, CUP Archive  Davis, Leesa S. (2010),  Advaita Vedānta and Zen Buddhism: Deconstructive Modes of Spiritual Inquiry, Continuum International Publishing Group  Dense, Christian D. Von (1999),  Philosophers and  Religious Leaders , Greenwood Publishing Group  Deussen, Paul (1980), Sixty Upaniṣads of the Veda, Volume 1, Motilal Banarsidass

•

•

•

•

•

 Deutsch, Eliot (1969),  Advaita Vedānta: A Philosophical Reconstruction , University of Hawaii Press  Deutsch, Eliot (1988),  Advaita Vedanta: A Philosophical Reconstruction , University of Hawaii Press, ISBN 0-88706-662-3

•

 Deutsch, Eliot; Dalvi, Rohit (2004),  The Essential  Vedanta: A New Source Book of Advaita Vedanta , World Wisdom, Inc.

•

 Doniger, Wendy (1999),  Merriam-Webster’s Encyclopedia of World Religions , Merriam-Webster

•

  Feuerstein, george (1978),  Handboek voor Yoga (Textbook of Yoga) , Ankh-Hermes

•

 Flood, Gavin; Olivelle, Patrick (2003),  The Blackwell Companion to Hinduism , Blackwell

•

  Fort, Andrew O. (1998),  Jivanmukti in Transformation: Embodied Liberation in Advaita and NeoVedanta, SUNY Press  Fuller, C. J. (2004),   The Camphor Flame: Popular Hinduism and Society in India , Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, ISBN 978-0-69112048-5

•

•

• •

•

•

Garfield, Jay L.; Priest, Graham (2003), NAGARJUNA AND THE LIMITS OF THOUGHT. In: Philosophy East & West Volume 53, Number 1 January 2003 1–21  (PDF)   Gier, Nicholas F. (2012), “Overreaching to be different: A critique of Rajiv Malhotra’s Being Different”, International Journal of Hindu Studies (Springer Netherlands) 16   (3): 259–285, doi:10.1007/s11407-012-9127-x, ISSN 1022-4556   Gleig, Ann Louise (2011),   Enlightenment After  the Enlightenment: American Transformations of  Asian Contemplative Traditions , RICE UNIVERSITY/ProQuest

•

•

•

 Grimes, John (1998), “Book reviews: Early Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism: The Mahayana Context of the Gaudapadiya-karika, by Richard King. SUNY Press, 1995.”,   Journal of the American Academy of Religion 66   (3): 684–686, doi:10.1093/jaarel/66.3.684, retrieved 2011-11-29  Grimes, John A. (1990), The seven great untenables:  Sapta-vidhā anupapatti , Motilal Banarsidass  Grimes, John A. (1996), A Concise Dictionary of Indian Philosophy: Sanskrit Terms Defined in English , SUNY Press   Hirst, J. G. Suthren (2005),   Śaṃkara’s Advaita Vedānta: A Way of Teaching , Routledge  Hiltebeitel, Alf (2002), Hinduism. In: Joseph Kita gawa, “The Religious Traditions of Asia: Religion, History, and Culture” , Routledge  Isaeva, N.V. (1993), Shankara and Indian Philoso phy, SUNY Press   Jacobs, Alan (2004),  Advaita and Western NeoAdvaita. In: The Mountain Path Journal, autumn 2004, pages 81–88 , Ramanasramam  Jones, Constance; Ryan, JamesD.,  Encyclopedia of  Hinduism, Infobase Publishing Kalupahana, David J. (1992), The Principles of Buddhist Psychology, Delhi: ri Satguru Publications Kalupahana, David J. (1994), A history of Buddhist   philosophy, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited   King, Richard (1995),   Early Advaita Vedānta and Buddhism: The Mahāyāna Context of the Gauḍapādīya-kārikā, SUNY Press King, Richard (1999), “Orientalism and the Modern Myth of “Hinduism"", NUMEN, Vol. 46, pp 146–  185 (BRILL)  King, Richard (2002),  Orientalism and Religion:  Post-Colonial Theory, India and “The Mystic East” , Taylor & Francis e-Library  King, Richard (2002),  Orientalism and Religion:  Post-Colonial Theory, India and “The Mystic East” , Routledge Kochumuttom, Thomas A. (1999), A buddhist Doctrine of Experience. A New Translation and Inter pretation of the Works of Vasubandhu the Yogacarin , Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass  Larson, Gerald James (1998),  Classical Sāṃkhya:  An Interpretation of Its History and Meaning , London: Motilal Banarasidass, ISBN 81-208-0503-8

25

13.1 Published sources •

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Larson, Gerald James (2009), Hinduism. In: “World  Religions in America: An Introduction” , Westminster John Knox Press  Lochtefeld, James G. (2002),  The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Hinduism. Volume One: A-M , The Rosen Publishing Group

•

•

 Lorenzen, David N. (2006),   Who Invented Hinduism: Essays on Religion in History , Yoda Press  Loy, David (1997), Nonduality. A Study in Comparative Philosophy , Humanity Books Lucas, Phillip Charles (2011), “When a Movement Is Not a Movement. Ramana Maharshi and NeoAdvaita in North America”, Nova Religio: The Journal of Alternative and Emergent Religions. Vol. 15, No. 2 (November 2011) (pp. 93–114)

•

•

•

Mahadevan, T. M. P. (1968), Preceptors of Advaita   Marek, David (2008),   Dualität – Nondualität. Konzeptuelles und nichtkonzeptuelles Erkennen in Psychologie und buddhistischer Praxis  (PDF)  McRae, John (2003),   Seeing Through Zen. Encounter, Transformation, and Genealogy in Chinese Chan Buddhism, The University Press Group Ltd, ISBN 978-0-520-23798-8  Michaels, Axel (2004), Hinduism. Past and present , Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press

•

•

•

Minor, Rober Neil (1987), Radhakrishnan: A Reli gious Biography, SUNY Press Morris, Brian (2006), Religion and Anthropology: A Critical Introduction , Cambridge University Press   Mukerji, Mādhava Bithika (1983),   Neo-Vedanta and Modernity, Ashutosh Prakashan Sansthan   Nakamura, Hajime (1990),   A History of Early Vedanta Philosophy. Part One , Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited   Nakamura, Hajime (2004),   A History of Early Vedanta Philosophy. Part Two , Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited  Nath, Vijay (2001), “From 'Brahmanism' to 'Hinduism': Negotiating the Myth of the Great Tradition”, Social Scientist 2001, pp. 19-50

•

•

•

•

•

 Nicholson, Andrew J. (2010),  Unifying Hinduism:  Philosophy and Identity in Indian Intellectual History, Columbia University Press

•

  Nikhalananda, Swami (1931),   Drg-Drsya-Viveka. An inquiry inti the nature of the 'seer' and the 'seen.' , Sri Ramakrishna Asrama

•

 Pande, Govind Chandra (1994),  Life and Thought  of Śaṅkarācārya, Motilal Banarsidass Publ, ISBN 978-81-208-1104-1   Pandey, S.L. (2000), Pre-Sankara Advaita. In:  Chattopadhyana (gen.ed.), “History of Science, Philosophy and Culture in Indian Civilization. Volume II  Part 2: Advaita Vedanta” , Delhi: Centre for Studies in Civilizations  Popular Prakashan (2000), Students’ Britannica India, Volumes 1-5 , Popular Prakashan  Potter, Karl H. (2008), The Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies: Advaita Vedānta Up to Śaṃkara and  His Pupils, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited  Puligandla, Ramakrishna (1997),  Fundamentals of  Indian Philosophy, New Delhi: D.K. Printworld (P) Ltd.  Raju, P.T. (1992),  The Philosophical Traditions of  India, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited  Rambachan, Anant Anand (1984),  The attainment  of moksha according to Shankara and Vivekananda with special reference to the significance of scripture (sruti) and experience (anubhabva)  (PDF), University of Leeds Rambachan, Anantanand (1991), Accomplishing the Accomplished: The Vedas as a Source of Valid  Knowledge in Shankara , University of Hawaii Press Rambachan, Anatanand (1994), The Limits of Scripture: Vivekananda’s Reinterpretation of the Vedas , University of Hawaii Press   Raṅganāthānanda, Swami; Nelson, Elva Linnéa (1991),  Human Being in Depth: A Scientific Ap proach to Religion, SUNY Press  Renard, Philip (2010),  Non-Dualisme. De directe bevrijdingsweg , Cothen: Uitgeverij Juwelenschip  Rosen, Steven (2006),  Essential Hinduism , Greenwood Publishing Group  Roodurmum, Pulasth Soobah (2002), Bhāmatī and  Vivaraṇa Schools of Advaita Vedānta: A Critical  Approach, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited Samuel, Geoffrey (2010), The Origins of Yoga and  Tantra. Indic Religions to the Thirteenth Century , Cambridge University Press Sarma, Chandradhar (1996), The Advaita Tradition in Indian Philosophy, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass

26 •

•

•

•

•

•

13 SOURCES 

Scheepers, Alfred (2000), De Wortels van het Indiase Denken, Olive Press   Shah-Kazemi, Reza (2006),   Paths to Transcendence: According to Shankara, Ibn Arabi & Meister  Eckhart , World Wisdom  Sharma, C. (1997), A Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy , Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 81-208-0365-5  Sharma, B. N. Krishnamurti (2000), History of the Dvaita School of Vedānta and Its Literature: From the Earliest Beginnings to Our Own Times , Motilal Banarsidass Publishers  Singh, N.; Barauh, B. (2004),  Encyclopaedic Dictionary of Pali Literature, Volume 1 , Global Vision Publishing Ho

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

[4]  Swami Dayananda Saraswati, Anubhava [5]  “Peter L. Holleran, ''What Is Advaita Vedanta '', excerpts taken from the book “All about Hinduism”, written by Sri Swami Sivananda”. Mountainrunnerdoc.com. Retrieved 2012-09-10. [6] [7]   Maharishi’s Teaching,   Meaning of the word “Satcitananda” (Sat Chit Ananda) [8]   “saccidānanda”.  Sanskrit Dictionary for Spoken Sanskrit . spokensanskrit.de. Retrieved 7 March 2013. [9]  Sanskrit dictionary for Spoken Sanskrit,  ananda

[10] Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan (1888—1975)  Sivananda (1977), Brahma Sutras , Motilal Banarsi-

dass

•

[3]  Advaita Academy, Experience versus knowledge – a brief  look at samAdhi (Part 2 of 2)

[11]   AshokVora, Radhakrishna’s notion of intuitiveknowledge:  a critique

Sivaraman, K. (1973), Śaivism in Philosophical Perspective: A Study of the Formative Concepts, Prob- [12]  DR. SIR S. RADHAKRISHNAN, Intellect and Intuition lems, and Methods of Śaiva Siddhānta , Motilall Bain Sankara’s Philosophy narsidass   Suzuki, Daisetz Teitarō   (1999),   Studies in the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra , Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass

[13]   Jiddu Krishnamurti, Saanen 2nd Conversation with Swami  Venkatesananda 26 July 1969 [14]  Encyclopedy of Hinduism,  Mahavakyas

 Svarghese, Alexander P. (2008), India : History, Re- [15]  “Advaita Yoga Ashrama, ''Jnana Yoga. Introduction''". ligion, Vision And Contribution To The World , AtYoga108.org. Retrieved 2012-09-10. lantic Publishers & Dist

[16]  “Antahkarana- Yoga (definition)". En.mimi.hu. Retrieved 2011-06-10. Thurman, Robert (1984), The Central Philosophy of  Tibet , Princeton University Press [17]  Oxford Index, nididhyāsana [18]  Sri Swami Sivananda, Karma Yoga

 Venkatramaiah, Munagala (2000),  Talks With Sri  Ramana Maharshi: On Realizing Abiding Peace and  [19]  “Puranas at Sacred Texts”. Sacred-texts.com. Retrieved 2012-09-10. Happiness, Inner Directions, ISBN 1-878019-00-7   Werner, Karel (1994),   The Yogi and the Mystic , Routledge

[20]   “Advaitasiddhi.org”. Advaitasiddhi.org.   Archived from the original on 22 June 2011. Retrieved 2011-06-10. [21]   Ashtavakra Samhita

 White (ed.), David Gordon (2000), Introduction. In:  Tantra in practice , Princeton and Oxford: Princeton [22]   Poojya Swami Sri Atmananda Saraswati,   Lessons on Tattva Bodha-1 University Press [23]  Tattva Bodha (Knowledge of Truth)

 Wilber, Ken (2000),  Integral Psychology , Shamb[24]  Atma Bodha, translation by Swami Chinmayananda hala Publications [25] Atma Bodha,

•

translation and commentary by

 Yogani (2011),   Advanced Yoga Practices Support  A.S.DEEKSHITULU and CH. SUNDARA RAMIAH Forum Posts of Yogani, 2005–2010 , AYP Publish[26]   Self-knowledge, translation and commentary by Swami ing Nikhilananda

13.2 Web-sources [1]  Sankara Acarya Biography – Monastic Tradition

[27]   Vedantasara, edited by Pandit V. Krishnamacharya (1953) [28]   Vedantasara, translation by Swami Nikhilananda

[2] “James Swartz, ''What is Neo-Advaita?''". Ad- [29]   Vedantasara , with Balobodhini-commentary of Apadeva vaita.org.uk. 10 July 2012. Retrieved 2012-09-10. (1911)

27 [30]   Vedantasara, translation and commentary by Swami [59]   Michael Hawley,   Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan (1888—  1975), Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy Nikhinalanda (1931) [31]   Vedantasara, edited by colonel G.A Jacob (1934) [32]   advaita-vision.org, Discrimination

[60]  Timothy Conway,   Neo-Advaita or Pseudo-Advaita and  Real Advaita-Nonduality

[61] What is Enlightenment? 1 September 2006 [33] [Sangeetha Menon (2007), Advaita Vedānta. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy] [62]  What is Enlightenment? 31 December 2001 [34]   Intro Vedanta-Tattvabodha

[63]  What is Enlightenment? 1 December 2005

[35] Himalayan Academy Publications (2002).   Hinduism’s [64]  Undivided Journal, About the Journal  Online Lexicon . (accessed: 30 March 2008) [65]  Jerry Katz on Nonduality,  What is Nonduality?   Sleep as a State of Consciousness in Ad[36]  Arvind Sharma, [66]  Jerry Katz, Nonduality.com – An Introduction vaita Vedånta. State University of New York Press [37]  advaita.org.uk, Om' – three states and one reality (An in- [67]  "Аdvaita – flame of nondualty – english”. Nonduality.narod.ru. Retrieved 2011-06-10. terpretation of the Mandukya Upanishad) [38]  Ramana Maharshi.  States of Consciousness. [39]  Sri Chinmoy. Summits of God-Life . [40]   advaita-deanta.org, Advaita Vedanta before Sankaracarya [41]  Anthony Peter Iannini (2001),  Nāgārjuna’s Emptiness and  Pyrrho’s Skepticism [42]  Sanskrit Dictionary for Spoken Sanskrit,  Utpāda [43]  Sanskrit Dictionary for Spoken Sanskrit,  Anutpāda

[68] Shankara, “Commentary on the Vedanta Sutras (Brahmasutra-Bhashya) [69]  Stanford Encyclopedia of Mysticism,  Mysticism [70]  Richard King (1999), Orientalism and Religion: Postcolonial Theory, India, and 'The Mystic East.

14 Further reading

[44]  Asram Vidya Order,  Biographical Notes About Sankara History And Gaudapada [45]  Shri Kavale Math

•

[46]  Swami B.V. Giri, Gaudya Touchstone,  Mayavada and  Buddhism – Are They One and the Same?  [47]   harekrishnatemple.com,  Mayavada Philosophy

•

[48]   harekrsna.com, The Mayavada School  [49]   Gaura Gopala Dasa,  The Self-Defeating Philosophy of  Mayavada

•

[50]  Sringeri Math, Sri Adi Shankaracharya [51]  THE BHAMATI AND VIVARANA SCHOOLS

•

[52]  Rajesh Anand, Vachaspati Mishra [53] Sangeetha Menon (2007), Advaita Vedānta , Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

•

[54]  Advaita Vision, teachers [55]  “Adi Shankara’s four Amnaya Peethams”. Archived from the original on 26 June 2006. Retrieved 2006-08-20.

•

[56]   iskcon.org, Heart of Hinduism: The Smarta Tradition [57]   Hinduism-guide.com, Hinduism [58]  “The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda/Volume 2/Jnana-Yoga/The Absolute and Manifestation – Wikisource”. En.wikisource.org. 5 April 2008.   Archived from the original on 28 June 2011. Retrieved 2011-0610.

  Nakamura, Hajime (1990),   A History of Early Vedanta Philosophy. Part One, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited   Nakamura, Hajime (2004),   A History of Early Vedanta Philosophy. Part Two , Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited   Potter, Karl H. (1981),   Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, vol. 3: Advaita Vedanta up to Sankara and his Pupils , Princeton: Princeton University Press   Potter, Karl H. (2006),   Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies vol. 11: Advaita Vedānta from 800 to 1200, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers   King, Richard (1995),   Early Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism: The Mahayana Context of the Gaudapadiya-Karika , SUNY Press  Isaeva, N.V. (1995), From Early Vedanta to Kashmir Shaivism: Gaudapada, Bhartrhari, and Abhinavagupta, SUNY Press

Introductions •

 Eliot Deutsch, Advaita Vedanta: a philosophical reconstruction, East-West Center Press, Honolulu, 1969

28 •

•

•

14 FURTHER READING 

 Kokileswar Sastri, An introduction to Adwaita philosophy: a critical and systematic exposition of the Sankara school of Vedanta, Bharatiya Publishing House, Varanasi, 1979.   M. K. Venkatarama Aiyar, Advaita Vedanta, according to Sankara, Asia Publishing House, New York, 1965.

•

•

•

Charles Johnston (2014), The Mukhya Upanishads:  Books of Hidden Wisdom , Kshetra Books.   V. Panoli (1991–1994),  Upanishads in Sankara’s own words: Isa, Kena, Katha, and Mandukya with the Karika of Gaudapada: with English translation, explanatory notes and footnotes, Mathrubhumi, Calicut. A. J. Alston (1980–1989), A Samkara source-book , Shanti Sadan, London.

•

Kapil N. Tiwari (1977), Dimensions of renunciation in Advaita Vedanta , Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi  S. G. Mudgal (1975),  Advaita of Sankara, a reap praisal: Impact of Buddhism and Samkhya on Sankara’s thought , Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi  Adya Prasad Mishra (1967), The development and   place of bhakti in Sankaran Vedanta , University of Allahabad

Shankara •

•

•

•

•

 Charles Johnston (2014),  The Vedanta Philosophy of Sankaracharya , Kshetra Books   Natalia V. Isayeva (1993), Shankara and Indian philosophy, SUNY, New York  Elayath. K. N. Neelakantan (1990), The Ethics of  Sankara, University of Calicut A. Ramamurti (1974),   Advaitic mysticism of  Sankara, Visvabharati, Santiniketan  Raghunath D. Karmarkar (1966),   Sankara’s Advaita, Karnatak University, Dharwar

 Eliot Deutsch and J. A. B. van Buitenen (1971),  A source book of Advaita Vedanta, University Press of  Sringeri Sharada Peetham Hawaii , Honolulu.

Practice •

•

 Ayyar, Krishnan, Introduction to Advaita Vedanta

Source books •

•

•

 Madhava Vidyaranya, Sankara-Digvijaya, translated by Swami Tapasyananda, Sri Ramakrishna Math, 2002, ISBN 81-7120-434-1.

Comans, Michael (2000), The Method of Early Advaita Vedānta: A Study of Gauḍapāda, Śaṅkara, Sureśvara, and Padmapāda , Delhi: Motilal Banar- Neo-Advaita sidass   Madhukar, The Simplest Way , Editions India, USA  Dalal, Neil (2009), “Contemplative Practice and & India 2006, ISBN 81-89658-04-2 Textual Agency in Advaita Vedanta",  Method and   Madhukar,  Erwachen in Freiheit , Lüchow Verlag, Theory in the Study of Religion 21 (2009) 15-27 German, 2.Edition, Stuttgart 2004,  ISBN 3-36303054-1   Dalal, Neil (2014),   “Contemplative Grammars: Śaṅkara’s Distinction of Upāsana and Nididhyāsana”, Journal of Indian Philosophy Indian languages •

•

•

•

•

 Dubois, Joël André-Michel (2014),   The Hidden Lives of Brahman: Sankara’s Vedanta through His Upanisad Commentaries, in Light of Contemporary Practice, SUNY

•

•

Topical studies •

•

 Arvind Sharma (1995),  The philosophy of religion and Advaita Vedanta: a comparative study in religion and reason , Pennsylvania State University Press

•

 Sinha, H. P., Bharatiya Darshan ki ruparekha  (Features of Indian Philosophy), 1993, Motilal Benarasidas, Delhi–Varanasi.   Swāmi Paramānanda Bhārati,   Vedānta Prabodha (in Kannada), Jnānasamvardhini Granthakusuma, 2004

Satyapal Verma (1992), Role of Reason in Sankara Contemporary criticism Vedanta, Parimal Publication, Delhi   Rao, Srinivasa (2011),   Advaita: A Contemporary Critique , Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-19 Sangam Lal Pandey (1989),  The Advaita view of  God , Darshana Peeth, Allahabad 807981-1 •

•

 Mishra, M.,  Bhāratīya Darshan  (भारतीय दर् शन), Kalā Prakāshan.

29

15 External links •

 Advaita Vedanta at DMOZ