Sunday, 27 October 2024

A great majority of Hindus are not in contact with their religious history therefore, they believe their inherited beliefs as the ultimate truth.+

Dr. S, Radhakrishnan has observed: ~The Hindu civilization is so-called since its original founders or earliest followers occupied the territory drained by the Sindhu (the Indus) river system corresponding to the North-West Frontier Province and Punjab. This is recorded in the Rig Veda, the oldest of the Vedas, the Hindu scriptures which give their name to this period of Indian history.

The people on the Indian side of the Sindhu were called Hindu by the Persians and the later Western invaders. That is the genesis of the word `Hindu'. (The Hindu View of Life by Dr. Radhakrishan, p.12).
Confronted by this difficulty, Dr. Radhakrishan realized that Hinduism seems to be a name without any content. Is it a museum of beliefs, a medley of rites, or a mere map, or a geographical expression? (The Hindu View of Life by Dr. Radhakrishan, p.11

Remember:~

A great majority of Hindus are not in contact with their religious history therefore, they believe their inherited beliefs as the ultimate truth.
Hinduism is not an Ancient Vedic religion or Santana Dharma. 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.

To acquire Self-knowledge or Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana, the seeker has to realize his inherited religion is adulterated in the past and it becomes a great obstacle to realizing the ultimate truth or Brahman.
While they do not accept the texts past the Vedas, they are still monists and uphold other Hindu views. In their reformations, they rejected Brahminical control and they were open to all castes and women.
Hinduism is based on myths and thus, the people of India are unaware of their inherited religious history. The Vedic Culture and Vedas are complete in themselves but Hinduism which is a non-Vedic belief system with all its ritual and conduct-oriented practices has been contributed largely by the orthodox priests to suit their convenience!
Supreme Court of India:~ Hinduism, as a religion, incorporates all forms of belief without mandating the selection or elimination of any one single belief,“ It is a religion that has no single founder, no single scripture, and no single set of teachings. It has been described as Santana Dharma, namely, eternal faith, as it is the collective wisdom and inspiration of the centuries that Hinduism seeks to preach and propagate,” ---Hinduism has no single founder or scripture: SC, The Times of India (Delhi) Dec 17, 2015
Hindus are idol worshipers of a large number of Gods and Goddesses whereas in Vedas the God has been described as:-
Max Müller says ~ "The religion of the Veda knows no idols; the worship of idols in India is a secondary formation, a degradation of the more primitive worship of ideal Gods."
In Vedas God has been described as:~
Yajurveda – chapter- 32:~God Supreme or Supreme Spirit has no ‘Pratima’ (idol) or material shape. He cannot be seen directly by anyone. He pervades all beings and all directions. T
Thus, Idolatry does not find any support from the Vedas.
Rig Veda: ~ The Atman (Soul or Spirit) 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)
The Vedas as a body of scripture contain many contradictions and they are fragmentary in nature. For Hindus, scriptures like the Bhagavad Gita, Ramayana, Mahabharata, and Puranas are more attractive and appealing than the Vedas. And also the Gods and Goddesses they worship differ considerably from the Vedic ones. The collection of hymns called Vedas written in praise of certain deities by poets over several centuries does not seem to have much significance for the Hindus.

Remember:~

Hindu religious literature is full of such aphorisms as ' there is no higher deity than the Guru; the Guru is the ultimate Truth and Deity. God and Avatars (incarnations) are secondary to the Guru in importance; there is no higher refuge, no higher target, no higher destination than the Guru; the Guru is God Himself; God and the Guru are one; he who makes a distinction between the Guru and God is ignorant and stupid, and scores of similar others. They abound both in Sanskrit and in modern Indian languages

People are born into different sects and remain followers. Most sects are founded by gurus; thus, the Indian belief system is a Guru Cult, i.e., it believes in the worship of the Guru as the Supreme Deity.
When a seeker cannot get full enlightenment from his inherited belief system, then only he searches elsewhere. And tries to enlighten himself further to clear the cobwebs of his understanding and seek guidance in his progress.
The paths of religion, yoga, and wisdom were intended for different classes of people. 
The path of wisdom is for the advanced seekers of truth. It deals with the nature of the ultimate Truth and Reality. It is meant for superior aspirants who have an inner urge to know the truth and it is not for those who are immersed in earthly desires.:~Santthosh Kumaar 

Saturday, 26 October 2024

The Advaitic truth is not limited to any particular language or religion.+

The Advaitic truth is not limited to any particular language or religion. Those who are stuck with the idea the truth belongs to particular religion and language will not be able to grasp the Advaitic wisdom, which is beyond form, time, and space. The truth is universal. Self-knowledge or Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana is for the whole of humanity.

Sage Sankara and Sage and Goudpada have declared non-dualistic truth centuries back, but one has to reach the destination with the scientific (rational) investigation, not through punditry or intellectuality. Until one mentally reaches the conclusion, the conviction will not arise. Without a 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.

It is no use arguing Bhagavan Buddha is wrong or Sage Sankara is right, but where we are going wrong in our understanding of the non-dualistic or Advaitic truth, propagated by the great sages of the past. Some say, that without Sunyavada, Advaita philosophy could not have come into existence because Advaita starts from where Sunyavada ends. That is why they say it is the extension of Buddhism.

If Advaita existed prior to Bhagavan Buddha, he would not have advocated Sunyavada at all because Advaita is the final and ultimate truth.

Since the Buddhist and the Vedic scriptures have been passed down by hearing, they were written down only relatively late so one wouldn't know whether to rely on the times they give. Also, a lot depends on the translation. Each 'Sloka' or sutta is open to many layers of interpretation.
That is why 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.

Sage Sankara himself had often said that his philosophy was based on Sruti or revealed scripture. This may be because, Sage Sankara addressed the ordinary man, who finds security in the idea of causality and thus in the idea of God—and Revelation is indispensable to prove the latter. He believed that those of superior intelligence, have no need for this idea of divine causality, and can, therefore, dispense with Sruti and arrive at the truth of Non-Dualism by pure reason.

Sage Sankara’s Supreme Brahman is Nirguna (without the Gunas), Nirakara (formless), Nirvisesha (without attributes), and Akarta (non-agent). He is above all needs and desires. Sankara says, "This Atman is self-evident. This Atman or Self is not established by proofs of the existence of the Self. It is not possible to deny this Atman, for it is the very essence of he who denies it. Atman is the basis of all kinds of knowledge.

The Soul, the Self, which is present in the form of consciousness is hidden by the illusory universe in which you exist. The Soul, the Self, which is present in the form of consciousness is the cause of the illusory universe in which you exist.

Satyam-Jnanam-Anantam-Anandam is not a separate attribute. They form the very essence of Brahman. Brahman cannot be described because the description implies a distinction. Brahman cannot be distinguished from any other than Brahman.

The objective world-the world of names and forms has no independent existence. The Atman alone has a real existence. The world is only phenomenal.: ~ Santthosh Kumaar

Orthodoxy is the path of ignorance. Ignorant worship mechanically performs the prescribed sacrifices without any thought as to why they are doing them.+

Orthodoxy is the path of ignorance. Ignorant worship mechanically performs the prescribed sacrifices without any thought as to why they are doing them.

That is why Ish Upanishads says: - Such people no wonder they grope in the dark. They are doomed unless someday the truth dawns on them that to save themselves they must seek Self-knowledge.
And also, it says:~ Worse, however, is the situation of those who worship vidya. The word Vidya ¸ usually means "knowledge', but here it is used to mean "gods and goddesses. Some people worship gods and goddesses so that they may someday attain the same status. They may get their desire fulfilled, but this will only delay their liberation. That is why the Upanishad says that they will be in deeper darkness.
Religious believers are sentimentally attached to their religion, religious ideas of God, scriptures, and religious code of conduct; they will not accept anything else as truth other than their accepted truth. There is no use in discussing with such a mindset because nothing can be gained from such a discussion.
Religious believers are unfit for the Atmic path unless they drop all their accumulated knowledge.
All sect-based beliefs are dualistic and unphilosophical nothing to do with the ultimate truth or Brahman. In spirituality the ultimate truth is God. Sage  Sankara’s wisdom has nothing to do with orthodox belief systems.
Sage Sankara: ~ VC- Let erudite scholars quote all the scripture, let Gods be invoked through sacrifices, let elaborate rituals be performed, let personal Gods be propitiated---yet, without the realization of one‘s identity With the Self, there shall be no liberation for the individual, not even in the lifetimes of a hundred Brahmas put together. (verses-6)
In Spirituality, the ultimate truth is God in truth. The Atman is the ultimate truth or Brahman or God in truth.
Sage Sankara’s wisdom has nothing to do with orthodox belief systems. Sage  Sankara is the only sage who has final authority on the Advaitic truth. The Advaitic truth is rational truth and scientific truth without dogma.
The Advaitic orthodoxy is not the means to acquire Self-knowledge or Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana. Advaitic orthodoxy is meant for the ignorant populace that is unfit to grasp the highest truth. The Advaitic orthodoxy has nothing to do with the ultimate truth or Brahman.
All sect-based beliefs are dualistic and unphilosophical nothing to do with the ultimate truth or Brahman. In spirituality, the ultimate truth is God in truth.
Thus, the Advaitic orthodoxy is a sect that has nothing to do with the Advaitic wisdom of the Sage  Sankara. Advaitic orthodox sect is meant for the ignorant populace.:~Santthosh Kumaar 

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

Ishopanishad: They sunk into the greatest depth of misery who worships the matter, instead of the All-Pervading God.+

Meher Baba said: ~ God is your innermost Self. Do not search for God outside of you. Let these words be inscribed in your heart. Nothing i...