It is also necessary for the foreigners to know why Ancient Vedic Religion or Sanatana Dharma is not present Hinduism.+

It is also necessary for foreigners to know why Ancient Vedic Religion or Sanatana Dharma is not present in Hinduism if they are seeking truth in India.

It is very much necessary for foreigners to know why Ancient Vedic Religion or Santana Dharma is not present in Hinduism if they are seeking truth in India.

India is a spiritual supermarket with diverse philosophies, theories, ideologies, and yoga beliefs. If they are not searching for truth only attracted to Indian culture and tradition then choose their path whichever satisfies them. The path of wisdom is the Atmic path.

Sage Sankara’s wisdom bifurcated from Advaitic orthodoxy is Self-knowledge or Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana. The serious seeker must follow the Atmic path and save their time and effort in their pursuit of truth.

Hinduism indulges in non-Vedic beliefs such as idolatry, ancestor worship, pilgrimages, priestcraft, offerings made in temples, the caste system, untouchability, and child marriages. All these lack Vedic sanctions therefore Hinduism is not Ancient Vedic religion or Santana Dharma.

Hinduism is the museum of diverse beliefs and dogmas. Hinduism is not the means to ‘Self’-knowledge or Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana.

All Hindus indulge in non-Vedic practices barred by the Vedas introduced by the different founders of the different sects of Hinduism at different times, whereas the Vedic religion, or Santana Dharma is ancient and has no founder.

Hinduism is not Santana Dharma or Vedic religion. Hinduism is not a religion. Rather it is a group of castes and sects found within India that share common beliefs while still remaining very different.

Hinduism is not a religion but more a way of life. The term "Hinduism" is used for labeling the entire Indian people.

To be considered an orthodox Hindu one need only accept the authority of Shruti, however, there is no universal agreement among Hindus on what constitutes Shruti. Vedantins consider the Vedanta, i.e., the Upanishads as Shruti but also include the Bhagavad-Gita and Brahma Sutras as authoritative.

For some Vaishnavas, the Bhagavata Purana is to be considered Veda. Some consider the Tantras are considered Veda. Thus, we find that there is ample scope for different philosophies and practices under the very broad umbrella of Hinduism.

When the religion of the Veda knows no idols then why so many gods and goddesses with different forms and names are being propagated as Vedic gods. Why these personal gods are introduced when the Vedic concept of God is free from form and attributes.

Bhagavad Gita: ~ Brahmano hi pratisthaham ~ Brahman (God) is considered the all-pervading consciousness, which is the basis of all the animate and inanimate entities and material. (14.27).

When Bhagavad Gita says, God is considered the all-pervading consciousness which is the basis of all the animate and inanimate entities and material then nothing has to be accepted as God other than consciousness.

The Vedas confirm God is Atman (Spirit), the ‘Self’.

Rig Veda: ~ The Atman is the cause; Atman is the support of all that exists in this universe. May ye never turn away from the Atman, the ‘Self’. May ye never accept another God in place of the Atman nor worship other than the Atman?" (10:48, 5)

Rig-Veda 1-164-46 and Y.V 32-1 clearly mention that God is “One”.

Rig Veda declares God is ‘ONE’ and God is Atman, then why believe and worship in place of real God.

Brihad Upanishad: ~ “If you think there is another entity, whether man or God there is no truth."

When Upanishad itself declares: ~ Sarvam khalvidam brahma ~ all this (universe) is verily Brahman. By following back all of the relative appearances in the world, we eventually return to that from which it is all manifest – the non-dual reality (Chandogya Upanishad).

Sage Sankara’s Supreme Brahman (God) is impersonal, Nirguna (without Gunas or attributes), Nirakara (formless), Nirvisesha (without special characteristics), immutable, eternal, and Akarta (non-agent). It is above all needs and desires. It is always the Witnessing Subject. It can never become an object as It is beyond the reach of the senses. Brahman is non-dual, one without a second. It has no other besides it. It is destitute of difference, either external or internal. Brahman cannot be described, because description implies distinction. Brahman cannot be distinguished from any other than It. In Brahman, there is not distinction between substance and attribute. Sat-Chit-Ananda constitutes the very essence or Svarupa of Brahman, and not just Its attributes. The Nirguna Brahman of Sage Sankara is impersonal.

Who introduced the concept of God with attributes and attributeless gods, when Yajur Veda says: ~ those who worship visible things, born of the prakrti, such as the earth, trees, bodies (human and the like), in place of God are enveloped in still greater darkness.

Therefore, all these add-ons prove that the form and attribute-based concepts are introduced by some sages of the past with a new belief system and code of conduct in the name of Vedas.

Thus, it proves that Hinduism is nothing to do with the ancient Santana Dharma or Vedic religion.

Hinduism does not consist of struggles and attempts to believe a certain doctrine or dogma. From the high spiritual flights of the Vedanta philosophy, of which the latest discoveries of science seem like echoes, to the low ideas of idolatry with its multifarious mythology, the agnosticism of the Buddhists, and the atheism of the Jains, each and all have a place in the Hinduism.

The vast ocean of Vedic religion or Santana Dharma was consistently steady and calm for a very long period. It appears that as a consequence of the rage of the Buddhist revolution it got suddenly disturbed and flowed down to us in disorder. Even today Vedic religion or Santana Dharma has not recovered from the onslaught of Buddhism and Jainism and is not able to settle in people's hearts in their original form in the same old measure.

That is why Swami Vivekananda~ The masses in India cry to sixty million gods and still die like dogs. Where are these gods? - Swami Vivekananda (Delivered In San Francisco, on May 28, 1900) -The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda/Volume 1/Lectures And Discourses/The Gita II

As indicated in ISH Upanishads: - By worshipping gods and goddesses you will go after death to the world of gods and goddesses. But will that help you? The time you spend there is wasted because if you were not there you could have spent that time moving forward towards ‘Self’-knowledge, which is your goal. In the world of gods and goddesses, you cannot do that, and thus you go deeper and deeper into darkness.

It clearly indicates that:-If the human goal is to acquire ‘Self’-Knowledge then why one has to indulge in rituals and glorifying the conceptual gods, goddesses, and gurus to go into deeper darkness. Instead spend that time moving forward towards ‘Self’-knowledge, which is one’s prime goal.

Since it is eternal and infinite, it comprises the only truth. The goal of Vedic religion, through the various yogas, is to realize that the consciousness (Atman) is actually nothing but Brahman.

The Vedic pantheon of gods is said, in the Vedas and Upanishads, to be the only higher manifestations of Brahman. For this reason, "ekam sat" (all is one), and all is Brahman.

One must remember that for all periods the Vedas are the final goal and authority, and if the Puranas differ in any respect from the Vedas, that part of the Puranas is to be rejected without mercy.

If Hindus believe in one God, why do people worship so many Gods? There are 33,000,000 Gods and Goddesses in Hinduism.

Unfortunately, Hindus have started worshipping so many idols. In fact, Vedas specifically say that idols have not to be worshipped. Here are quotes from the principal Scriptures which say that Idols shouldn’t be worshipped.

Yajur Veda indicates that: ~ They sink deeper in darkness those who worship sambhuti. (Sambhuti means created things, for example, table, chair, idol, etc. - (Yajurveda 40:9)

Those who worship visible things born of the prakrti, such as the earth, trees, and bodies (human and the like) in place of God are enveloped in still greater darkness, in other words, they are extremely foolish, fall into an awful hell of pain and sorrow, and suffer terribly for a long time."-(Yajur Veda 40:9.)

The Hindus believed in polytheism, believing all of their Gods to be separate individuals, which was introduced much later by the founders of Hinduism which contains diverse beliefs caste, and creed.

When the religion of the Veda knows no idols then why so many gods and goddesses with different forms and names are being propagated as Vedic Gods. Why these conceptual gods are introduced when the Vedic concept of God is free from form and attributes.

Vedic religion was modified and reintroduced with new add-ons by Sage Sankara a great Advaita Master to uplift the Vedic culture and Santana Dharma, which were in ruins in the clutches of Buddhism. 18 Puranas are introduced in the name of Sage Veda Vyasa not by Sage Sankara but by someone else because the Puranic gods are non-Vedic Gods. Worship of Such gods is barred in Vedas.

As one goes deeper in the annals of history, it indicates the fact that somewhere someone has added the Puranas in the name of Sage Veda Vyasa the grand master of Vedas. It is impossible to accept and believe that Sage Veda Vyasa authored and introduced Puranas which has all conceptual gods because:~

The Buddhist influence is seen in a great measure in the Vedic philosophy which is followed by the majority of Indians. Thus, it is clear that the Vedic religion or Santana Dharma has not retained its original form, but has been influenced by other religions and has undergone a sea change. Thus the influence of Buddhism on Santana Dharma is extraordinary. Even Kumarila Bhatta, who fought with great heroism for the revival of Santana Dharma or Vedic religion, was so much influenced by Buddhism that he established for the first time in the country, an atheist Vedic religion or Santana Dharma. There is no room for any doubt to assert that the Kumarila Bhatta School was influenced by atheist Buddhism because the school which is based on the validity of the Vedas and rituals refutes the existence of God.

Sage Sankara endeavored toward establishing the Vedic religion and overthrowing Buddhism. But even he was not able to avoid the influence of Buddhism. The influence of the revolutionary atmosphere of Buddhism has reappeared in the Advaita of Sage Sankara. His inability to revive the Vedic religion that flourished before the Buddhist revolution in its pure form is discernible.

Many thinkers since his time have said about Sage Sri Sankara that he made use of many important tenets of Buddhism and presented to the people the very Buddhism in the guise of Santana Dharma or Vedic religion.

Though the Santana Dharma or Vedic religion represented by Sage Sankara is like a conglomeration of many things he deserves the credit of having turned the Hindu mind which was once averse to Vedas -the root of Hinduism, towards the Vedas once again. For this, the followers of Santana Dharma or Vedic Religion should be grateful to Sage Sri Sankara.

The brilliance shown by Sage Sankara, a man of wonderful genius, a matchless speaker, and an extraordinary dialectician is really a great spectacle in history. In his time, there was a severe conflict between Buddhism and the atheist Santana Dharma, or the Vedic religion of Kumarila Bhatta. Utilizing this opportunity Sage Sankara intervened in the conflict and made use of some concepts and methodology of both the Kumarila Bhatta School and Buddhism to present a new coalition religion before the people.

Sage Sankara gave an extraordinary charisma to this religion with the help of his methods of logic and style of exposition. Its influence was so much that both the Bhatta School and Buddhism had to flee from India without leaving a trace. The absence, even today, of a single follower of the Kumarila Bhatta School as well as of Buddhism, is proof enough for the great achievement of Sage Sankara. This indeed is a historical miracle.

One can see in the Santana Dharma or Vedic religion expounded by Sage Sankara a different version of the Kumarila Bhatta School and Buddhism. That is why the tradition of following Kumarila Bhatta's methodology in expounding the Advaita thought at the empirical level gained ground in the Advaita School. Different types of the methodology of Buddhism were absorbed into the Advaita thought, of course, under new labels. There is a very clear similarity between the Vedic religion of Sage Sankara and Buddhism and the Advaita School has given the world a common message. The essence of both the schools is:-

The entire world which man perceives is illusionary; it is just an appearance of unreality and there is only one indeterminate and attributeless Sat at the root of this world".

The term Hindu religion is totally a new name that cannot be found in any Indian literature prior to 1794 A.D.

Out of the five Indian religions of Buddhism, Jainism, Saivism, Vaishnavism, and Sikhism; Saivism and Vaishnavism were brought under the Varnashrama principle.

After naming the discriminating principle of casteism of Manu Dharma as Hinduism, the religions of Saivism and Vaishnavism, which were enslaved to the caste discriminating principles, were given a new name as ‘Hinduism’! Thus, the Hindu religion is different from Santana Dharma or Vedic religion.

The term Hinduism came into existence under British rule. Hinduism is caste discriminating principle of Varnashrama Dharma based on the Book of Manu.

After 1750 A.D., Europeans captured certain parts of India and started ruling those areas. The capital of British India was Calcutta present-day Kolkata.

The Britishers were duty-bound to administer justice to the people living within their dominion. Thus, they set up courts of justice. They needed laws to administer justice through the courts.

To administer justice to the Christian citizens of India living within their dominion, there was Christian Law, based on Biblical principles.

To administer justice to the Muslim citizens of India living within their dominion, there was Islamic Law, based on Quranic principles. But to administer justice to non-Christian and non-Islamic citizens living in British dominion, there was no law book. This created problems for the Britishers.

As we peep into the annals of the religious history of India we find that Santana Dharma or Vedic religion was not the religion of the Hindus: ~

Every one of the great religions in the world, except our own, is built upon such historical characters; but ours rests upon principles. There is no man or woman who can claim to have created the Vedas. They are the embodiment of eternal principles; sages discovered them.

Santana Dharma or Vedic religion was not the religion of the Hindus, nor were the Vedic people Hindus, nor will the Hindus of today approve the replacement of the term ‘Hinduism’ with Santana Dharma or Vedic Religion. None can say exactly when the Aryans became Hindus because neither the name Hindu nor its major beliefs and practices existed in the Vedic times.

To this, one must add the marginal place the Vedic gods occupy in today’s Hindu pantheon. In addition, as we have seen, the Vedas themselves are not attractive to most of today’s Hindus as sacred texts. The Ramayana, Mahabharata, Bhagavad-Gita, Puranas, and Manusmriti, may have more to do with the Hinduism of today than the Vedas.

Thus, it is clear that there is no direct ancestry of modern Hinduism traceable in the Vedas, though it does have some influence on it “The Vedic corpus reflects the archetypal religion of those who called themselves Aryas, and which, although it contributed to facets of latter-day Hinduism, was nevertheless distinct”.

In British Raj, Sir William Jones was appointed as the chief justice of the Supreme Court at Calcutta. Local pundits made Sir William Jones believe that the book of Manu was the law book for the people of India.

Sir William Jones believed pundits and translated the book of Manu from Sanskrit to English. Thus, on the basis of the laws of Manu, a law was formed for administering justice to non-Christian and non-Muslim Indians of the British dominion, and this law was called as the Hindu law.

The principles of the book of Manu which was used for drafting the Hindu Law were called as Hinduism. The basic principle of the book of Manu is caste discrimination.

The name coined by Sir William Jones to denote caste-discriminating principles is Hinduism. It is not a religion. It is a way of Life. It is the way of life of the Indus people.

In this, a historic false perception crept in. That is when they called the terms Christian Law, Muslim law, and Hindu Law, both Christian Law, and Muslim Law were associated with the Christian religion and Islamic religion. But in respect of Hindu Law, a false perception of religion was wrongly attributed to it as if it was also associated with a ‘Hindu religion that was not there.

This false perception developed a false notion that non-Christian and non-Muslim Indians of the British dominion was belonging to the Hindu religion.

The book of Manu is nothing to do with the Vedas and Vedic religion or Santana Dharma.

Indian populace wrongly believes that Hinduism is an ancient religion because they are unaware of the fact that Hinduism is not the Santana Dharma or Vedic religion. The people in India believe in Varnashrama Dharma or caste discrimination.

The people of India have to liberate themselves from the stranglehold of casteism to realize their original religion is not Hinduism which is full of different castes and creeds but the Santana Dharma or Vedic religion. The people should be educated about the historic truth of the religion of the Santana Dharma or Vedic religion.

Out of the five Indian religions, Saivism and Vaishnavism were already enslaved to Varnashrama Dharma i.e. caste discrimination. The people of India began to use the newly originated common name of ‘Hinduism’ to denote Saivism and Vaishnavism. The context and substance of the term Hinduism; coined by Sir William Jones are different from the context and substance of this term ‘Hindu religion, which was substituted erroneously and used by the people to denote Saivism and Vaishnavism.

The term Hinduism came into existence under British rule. Hinduism is the caste discriminating principle of Varnashrama Dharma based on of the Book of Manu.

After 1750 A.D., Europeans captured certain parts of India and started ruling those areas. The capital of then British India was Calcutta present-day Kolkata.

The Britishers were duty-bound to administer justice to the people living within their dominion. Thus, they set up courts of justice. They needed laws to administer justice through the courts.

To administer justice to the Christian citizens of India living within their dominion, there was Christian Law, based on Biblical principles.

To administer justice to the Muslim citizens of India living within their dominion, there was Islamic Law, based on Quranic principles. But to administer justice to non-Christian and non-Islamic citizens living in British dominion, there was no law book. This created problems for the Britishers.

At this time, Sir William Jones was appointed as the chief justice of the Supreme Court at Calcutta. Local pundits made Sir William Jones believe that the book of Manu was the law book for the people of India.

Sir William Jones believed pundits and translated the book of Manu from Sanskrit to English. Thus, on the basis of the laws of Manu, a law was formed for administering justice to non-Christian and non-Muslim Indians of the British dominion, and this law was called as the Hindu law.

The principles of the book of Manu which was used for drafting the Hindu Law were called as Hinduism. The basic principle of the book of Manu is caste discrimination.

The name coined by Sir William Jones to denote caste-discriminating principles is Hinduism. It is not a religion. It is a way of Life. It is the way of life of the Indus people.

In this, a historic false perception crept in. That is when they called the terms Christian Law, Muslim law, and Hindu Law, both Christian Law and Muslim Law were associated with the Christian religion and Islamic religion. But in respect of Hindu Law, a false perception of religion was wrongly attributed to it as if it was also associated with a ‘Hindu religion that was not there.

It is necessary for the seekers of truth to realize that Hinduism is nothing to do with Spirituality because Hinduism is based on the matter whereas Vedic religion or Santana Dharma is based on the Spirit(Atman). : ~ Santthosh Kumaar

Genuine Spirituality or Adyatma must be independent of religion.+

The history of Advaita is replete with interpretation and reinterpretation of Sage Sankara’s philosophical work the generation of Advaita followers that succeeded Sage Sankara wrote many commentaries on Sage Sankara’s work each commentator claimed that he grasped the essence and true intent of Sage Sankara and went on to write according to his own understanding. In that process, he wove into the commentaries, and his personal views and hoisted them on Sage Sankara.

This kind of adulation gave rise to several versions of Advaita. The numerous glosses written by his followers tried to blend a ritualistic attitude with the monistic inclination of the Master. The result was the distortion of Sage Sankara’s position.

The purpose of the scriptures, Sage Sankara said, was to describe reality as it is. Sage Sankara rejected the Mimamsa view and argued that scripture was not mandatory in character, at least where it concerned the pursuit of wisdom.

Upanishads, he remarked, dealt with Brahman (God in truth) and that Brahman could not be a subject matter of injunction and prohibitions.

Sage Sankara strongly advocated the study of Upanishads and at the same time cautioned that the study of Upanishad alone would not lead to liberation. In matters such as spiritual attainment, one’s own experience was the sole authority and it cannot be disputed.

Sage Sankara also said the study of Upanishad was neither indispensable nor a necessary prerequisite for attaining the human goal, the moksha.

Sage Sankara pointed out; that even those who were outside the Upanishad fold were as eligible for moksha as those within the fold were.

Sage Sankara declared that all beings are Brahman, and therefore the question of discrimination did not arise. All that one was required to do was to get rid of ignorance (Duality).

Remember:~

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

The main hurdle in his way of thinking was that Sage Sankara did not claim to be an original thinker at all, and his philosophy took the form of commentaries on the generality of Hindu scriptures, particularly the Upanishads and the Gita.

Sage Sankara was an independent thinker. Sage Sankara's Advaitic wisdom has not been taken seriously by many in India because most of the followers of Sage Sankara are orthodox.

It is that philosophy in India was for centuries more an exposition of the ancient classics than the independent thought of individual thinkers as in ancient Greece or modern Europe and America.

Sage Sankara and Sage Gaudapada are independent thinkers other schools of Indian philosophy are mere theologies. Advaitic Spirituality or Adyathma is a real philosophy. The dualistic spirituality cannot escape the charge of dogmatism.

Intelligence and thought, are not applicable to Advaitism intelligence and thought are based on the false self (ego) within the false experience (waking).

The whole Advaitic philosophy is an attempt to transcend the limitations of intelligence and thought.

The two points of view A Gnani is not cut off from the experience of practical life within the practical world because the Advaitic truth is neither realism nor idealism; it is beyond both these.

Sage Sankara said:- Talk as much philosophy as you like, worship as many Gods as you please, observe ceremonies, and sing devotional hymns, but liberation will never come, even after a hundred aeons, without realizing the Oneness.

Advaita does not begin with the ultimate truth. The ultimate truth has to be proved, not assumed. Hence, so-called philosophers who take Brahman for granted are not philosophers at all.

Lots of Advaitin scholars will teach that all is yourself, but none of them can show that this is so, none has analyzed it scientifically, and none can prove it.

The rational proof is required so that one arrives at knowing the ultimate truth or Brahman i.e. Gnana. Theirs are mere dogmas, parrotism, and repetition of what they read in scripture. Authoritarianism merely assumes as true what another says, but what has yet to be proved.

Consciousness is that which knows everything, that which sees. Consciousness alone remains after one gets rid of all thoughts and ideas by identification with the Self. Consciousness is only the seer; it is not Brahman that is an error. It becomes Brahman only after inquiry and reasoning. :~Santthosh Kumaar

The spiritual journey is an inner journey. The inner journey is a mental journey.+

 

Start your mental (inner) journey even though you may find it difficult at first as you go on reading the post your subconscious will start dropping the dualistic egocentric knowledge and start accepting the Soul-centric Self-knowledge or Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana.

The spiritual journey is an inner journey. The inner journey is a mental journey. The inner journey begins with the first step.

The outer journey that never goes beyond the illusory form, time, and space does not lead to Self-awareness of belonging to a religion.

The inner journey is not related to religion and yoga. The inner journey is to discover and realize the Soul, which is the Self. The Soul, the Self, which is present in the form of consciousness is hidden by the illusory form, time, and space.

The guidance comes in any form when the seeker is ready and receptive to take the mental (inner) journey.

As you mentally cross the ‘I’ and get to the other side once you are on the other side of the ‘I’ is the reality, which is hidden by the illusory form, time, and space. You will realize that the ‘I’ is an illusion.

Self-knowledge or Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana has nothing to do with the ‘I-centric' teaching.

Remember, the ‘I’ is not an individual because the ‘I’ is the whole universe. Limiting the ‘I’ to individuality is the cause of experiencing the dualistic illusion of reality.

The nature of the ‘I’ is the nature of the mind.

The nature of the mind is the nature of the universe.

The nature of the universe is the nature of the waking.

The nature of the waking is the nature of the illusion.

Thus, it is necessary to study the nature of the ‘I’ to unfold the mystery of the universe.

All the teachings limit the ‘I’ to an individual and glorify the ‘I’ without knowing what this ‘I’ is supposed to be in actuality. All ‘I’ based teachings are inadequate and useless for the serious seeker of truth.

If you are seeking truth nothing but the truth must discard without mercy such teaching in order to progress in your spiritual quest.

The seeker must know the ‘I’ is not limited to individuality. The seeker has to see the ‘I’ as the universe, to overcome ignorance. When the Advaitic wisdom dawns, then the ignorance vanishes.

When ignorance vanishes and the dualistic illusion (world) you used to think as reality becomes unreal. :~ Santthosh Kumaar

Buddhism has not proved the truth of Nonduality. Buddhist does not believe in Athma.Nonduality has to be based on Athma.+

The seeker must have the courage of Bhagavan Buddha to accept the truth and reject the untruth. Since Bhagavan Buddha rejected religion, the idea of God, and the scriptures, therefore, it is evident that he has gone through every aspect and verified and found them to be inadequate and useless for the pursuit of truth.

That is why Bhagavan Buddha said: ~ “Believe nothing because a wise man said it, Believe nothing because it is generally held. Believe nothing because it is written. Believe nothing because it is said to be divine. Believe nothing because someone else said it. But believe only what you, yourself judge to be true.

Dalai Lama said: ~ Buddhism need not be the best religion though it is most scientific and religion and inquisitive. But Buddhism has no answer to certain questions like the existence of Atama (Soul) and rebirth. Dali lama said that as an individual he believes in rebirth as he had come across a few cases of rebirth. Modern science, Dalai Lama hoped would unearth the mystery behind the rebirth. (In DH –dec-212009-Gulburga).

Buddhists do not believe in Atma. Thus, the entire Buddhist theories and sutras are physical-based, therefore; they yield the truth of the part not the truth of the whole.

All the Buddhist teachings are not of the Buddhas but it is mixed up with other religions of different nations in Asia which were merged with Buddhism.

Thus, It is very difficult to get the true essence of pure essence Bhagavan Buddha‘s wisdom.

Buddhism has not proved the truth of Nonduality. Advaitic Sages agree Bhagavan Buddha pointed out the unreality of the world.

Bhagavan Buddha told people they were foolish to cling to it. But he stopped there. He came nearest to Advaita in speech but not to Advaita fully.

Only when we independently search for the truth without religion and its doctrine then we will be able to realize the truth beyond form, time, and space.

Buddhism believes in reincarnation. Buddhism does not believe in the existence of Athma. Buddhism does not believe in the existence of God whereas Sage Sankara proved the existence of Athma and the existence of Brahman or God by declaring Atman is Brahman. From the standpoint of Athma, reincarnation is an illusion because birth, life, death, and the world are merely an illusion.

Bhagavan Buddha was a Gnani, not his followers. Bhagavan Buddha’s wisdom was lost, it is because it was mixed up and messed up with other religions in Asia wherever it existed.

Bhagavan Buddha was not Buddhist. Bhagavan Buddha was not the founder of Buddhism because he rejected the religion, scriptures, and the idea of God.

To get the pure essence of the wisdom of Bhagavan Buddha, Buddhism has to be bifurcated from Bhagavan Buddha's wisdom because Buddhism and all its Sutras are physicalized.

Bhagavan Buddha started the quest and Sage Sankara completed the journey. Bhagavan Buddha & Sage Sankara both are sages of truth. Humanity owes gratitude to both great sages of truth.

Buddhism has not proved the truth of Nonduality because Buddhists do not believe in Athma. Nonduality has to be based on Athma. Athma is the very essence of non-duality.

Sage Sankara says the Athma is Self-evident. It is not established by extraneous proofs. It is not possible to deny the Athma because it is the very essence of the one who denies it. The Athma is the basis of all kinds of knowledge, presuppositions, and proofs. The Athma is the Self.

Bhagavan Buddha pointed out the unreality of the world and he told people, they were foolish to cling to it. However, he stopped there. He came nearest to Advaita in speech but not to Advaita fully.

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

Unless one exercises his Reason (Buddhi) there is no chance of getting the ultimate truth or Brahman.:~Santthosh Kumaar

Unless we bifurcate Buddha from Buddhism and Sage Sankara from Hinduism,the Advaita hidden by the Dvaita will not be revealed.+

 

Unless we bifurcate Bhagavan Buddha from Buddhism and Sage Sankara from Hinduism the Advaita (Soul), which is hidden by the Dvaita (ignorance) will not be revealed.

There is no need to argue Bhagavan Buddha is wrong and Sage Sankara is right but the seeker must find out where he is going wrong in understanding the great Sages of truth.

Bhagavan Buddha was a Gnani, not his followers. Bhagavan Buddha’s wisdom was lost, it is because it is mixed up and messed up with other religions in Asia wherever it existed. Bhagavan Buddha started the quest and Sage Sankara completed the journey.

India is the ancient land, where wisdom made its home India whose soil has been trodden by the feet of the greatest Sages of truth like Bhagavan Buddha, Sage Sankara, and Sage Goudpada.

India is the fountainhead of Advaitic wisdom. Advaitic wisdom is brighter and greater which unfolds the mystery of the universe containing the whole of humanity.

The goal of the truth-seeker is to acquire Self-knowledge or Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana. Self-knowledge or Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana is inherent in every seeker of truth. Self-knowledge or Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana does not come from outside, it is hidden within the world in which we exist.

Buddha is not physical. Buddha is the state where which is empty of the illusory division of form, time, and space. Buddha is the fullness of consciousness.

Buddhism has nothing to do with Bhagavan Buddha because Buddhism is physical. Buddhism is based on form, time, and space whereas Buddha is a formless, timeless, and spaceless existence.

From a Nondualistic perspective, nothingness or emptiness is the nondual nature of the Soul the Self. The Soul the Self, is identified as nothingness or emptiness because it is formless, timeless, and spaceless existence. Everything is nothingness.

Nothingness is everything and everything is nothingness. Nothingness is nonduality and everything is duality.

Nothingness is the real nature of the Soul the innermost Self and everything else is the unreal nature of the Soul. Nothingness is eternal because there is no second thing that exists other than nothingness, which is the nature of the Soul.

Dalai Lama said:~ Buddhism need not be the best religion though it is most scientific and religion and inquisitive. But Buddhism has no answer to certain questions like the existence of Atama (Soul) and rebirth. Dali lama said that as an individual he believes in rebirth as he had come across a few cases of rebirth. Modern science, Dalai Lama hoped would unearth the mystery behind the rebirth. (In DH –dec-212009-Gulburga).

The Buddhists are unaware of the fact that the Soul is Self-evident. It is not established by extraneous proofs. It is not possible to deny the Soul because It is the very essence of the one who denies It.

The Soul is the basis of all kinds of knowledge, presuppositions, and proofs. Self is within, the Self is without; the Self is before, the Self is behind; the Self is on the right, the Self is on the left; the Self is above and the Self is below. Soul is everything. Thus, the Soul, which is present in the form of consciousness, is the ultimate truth or Brahman.

Buddhists believe in emptiness but they are unaware of the fact that emptiness is the nature of the Soul.

The Soul is the Self. The Soul is present in the form of consciousness. The Soul is the witness-consciousness that experiences the action, the actor, and the world of separate things. It is like a light that illuminates everything in a theater, revealing the master of ceremonies, the guests, and the dancers with complete impartiality. Even when they all depart, the light shines to reveal their absence.

Bhagavan Buddha gave nondualistic wisdom whereas Buddhism has many teachings. Bhagavan Buddha’s wisdom was lost because it is buried under the diverse teachings of Buddhism.

Buddhism has not proved the truth of Nonduality whereas Bhagavan Buddha pointed out the unreality of the world and he told people they were foolish to cling to it. But he stopped there. He came nearest to Advaita in speech but not to Advaita fully.

Buddhism did not prove the truth of nonduality because they do not believe in the existence of the Soul. Without the existence of the Soul talking of nonduality is like building a castle with the air.

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

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

Advaitic Sages disagree with Buddhists only on the Ultimate question, but they agree with their idealism fully.

Even when you say "I am not" you are thinking. Hence, every thought means positing some existence. To exist is to be thought of hence our criticism of Sunyavada which says there is nothing. In saying "There is nothing" they are unconsciously positing something. The thought of nothing is existence itself. Hence only by refraining from thought can they state their case. The thought itself is an object. The negation of existence is a thought.

The presence of an object means duality. Hence, this proves that the Sunyavadins never understood non-duality, i.e. Brahman.

Buddhism agrees in thinking that the ego sees itself; they do not admit there is anything that sees the ego: they say there is no proof that any witness exists. When thoughts are there, thoughts become conscious of them. Skandhas which appear and disappear are objects only Buddhists are unaware of the subject.

Only when we independently search for the truth without religion and its doctrine then we will be able to realize the truth beyond form, time, and space.

Sage Sankara and Bhagavan Buddha have given the world a common message. The essence of both the Sages is: ~ The entire world which one perceives is illusionary; it is just an appearance of unreality and there is only one indeterminate and attributeless truth at the root of this world".

Bhagavan Buddha, Sage Sankara, and Sage Goudpada have declared nondualistic truth centuries back. The seeker has to reach the destination with scientific (rational investigation, not through punditry and intellectuality.

The seeker must do his homework, and verify the validity of all the claims, rather than blindly believe, what others expound as knowledge, till; the un-contradicted truth is obtained.

The seeker must have the courage of Bhagavan Buddha to accept the truth and reject the untruth. Since Bhagavan Buddha rejected religion, the idea of God, and scriptures, therefore, it is evident that he has gone through every aspect and verified and found them to be inadequate and useless for the pursuit of truth.

That is why Bhagavan Buddha said: ~ “Believe nothing because a wise man said it, Believe nothing because it is generally held. Believe nothing because it is written. Believe nothing because it is said to be divine. Believe nothing because someone else said it. But believe only what you, yourself judge to be true.

Bhagavan Buddha:~ There are only two mistakes one can make along the road to truth: not going all the way... and not starting.

One has to mentally reach the final conclusion then only the conviction becomes firm. Without firm conviction, wisdom will not dawn. Therefore, there is a need to know consciousness is real all else is a myth, which Sage Sankara declared as the world is a myth Brahman alone is real.

Sage Sankara says Atman is Brahman and everything is Brahman is a scientific declaration not religious or yogic.

Sage Sankara and Sage Goudpada are more scientific than anyone else in the world. Since the real Advaitic essence is hidden it cannot be got without the inner (mental) journey.

Sage Goudpada says:~ The merciful Veda teaches karma and Upasana to people of lower and middling intellect while Jnana is taught to those of higher intellect.

Gnana here is knowledge uncontradictable truth or scientific truth. Thus their scientific truth of the whole, not the part is declared by Sage Sankara many centuries back and thought only to those of higher intellect. Thus, karma, Upasana, yoga, and orthodoxy have to be bifurcated in order to realize the ultimate truth or Brahman or God in truth.

Advaitic Wisdom is for those who are capable of inquiring into their own existence to know and realize the ultimate truth of Brahman or God in truth. : ~Santthosh Kumaar

Self-knowledge or Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana is concerned with Spirituality or Adyathma.+

Self-knowledge or Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana is not the knowledge of religion and religious Gods. Religion and its religious Gods have nothing to do with Self-knowledge or Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana.

Self-knowledge or Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana knowledge of the Spirit, the real God, hidden by the ‘I’, which is ignorance.

Isa Upanishads indicates that: ~ “ By worshipping Gods and Goddesses and going to the world of Gods after death is of no use. The time one spends in ritualistic practices is wasted; one can spend the same time moving forward toward Self-knowledge, which is the main goal. One cannot reach the non-dual destination by glorifying God and Goddesses and by doing that, one goes deeper and deeper into darkness. It surely indicates the fact that the seeker of truth has to drop worshiping God and Goddess to get Self-knowledge.

Ish Upanishad:~ "Those people who have neglected the attainment of Self-knowledge and have thus committed suicide.

10/11/12

Those people who have neglected the attainment of Self-knowledge and have thus committed suicide, as it were, are doomed to enter those worlds after death.

This is a condemnation of people who do not try to attain Self-knowledge. They are, in a real sense, committing suicide, for what can be worse than being a slave to sense enjoyment, completely oblivious of the real purpose of life, which is to be one’s, own master?

Ish Upanishads:-

MANTRA 10

Vidya and Avidya both are hindrances to Self-knowledge, but Vidya is even worse than Avidya. The word Vidya is used here in a special sense; here it means worshipping Gods and Goddesses. By worshipping Gods and Goddesses you will go after death to the world of Gods and Goddesses. But will that help you? The time you spent there is wasted because if you were not there you could have spent that time moving forward towards Self-knowledge, which is your goal. In the world of Gods and Goddesses, you cannot do that, and thus you go deeper and deeper into darkness.

Avidya is Karma and therefore a hindrance. You perform Avidya - i.e., you perform Agnihotra and other sacrifices. This is a roundabout way of purifying the mind, and it is also groping in the dark. But it may not have as heavy a toll on your time and energy as the other.

Ishopanishad: ~ “They are steeped in ignorance and sunk into the greatest depth of misery who worships the matter, instead of the All-Pervading God and those who worship things born of matter like trees, animals, man, etc. are sunk deeper in misery."

The seeker must do his homework, and verify the validity of all the claims, rather than blindly believe, what others expound as knowledge, till; the un-contradicted truth is obtained.

The seeker must have the courage of Bhagavan Buddha to accept the truth and reject the untruth. Since Bhagavan Buddha rejected religion, the idea of God, and the scriptures, therefore, it is evident that he has gone through every aspect and verified and found them to be inadequate and useless for the pursuit of truth.

That is why Bhagavan Buddha said: ~ “Believe nothing because a wise man said it, Believe nothing because it is generally held. Believe nothing because it is written. Believe nothing because it is said to be divine. Believe nothing because someone else said it. But believe only what you, yourself judge to be true.

Bhagavan Buddha: - There are only two mistakes one can make along the road to truth: not going all the way... and not starting. : ~ Santthosh Kumaar