Hinduism is a group of sects with different beliefs and ideologies founded by different founders in different regions of India.+

India has never attacked any other country in past history but has been invaded again and again and again.

Hindus believe in the doctrine of reincarnation. This is the belief that each of us has a soul and that our souls are involved in a cycle of birth, death, and rebirth. 

Reincarnation is tied closely to the doctrine of karma. Karma is the belief that the actions during the previous life determine the conditions of each person's birth.  

Hinduism is the only religion that has not reduced itself to one man, one scripture, and one faith because it has many sects, diverse beliefs, and many founders of the sect in different regions of India 20% of the people on this planet are Hindus.  Hinduism is non-Vedic. "Know Thyself"  is the quintessence of Vedic religion or Santana Dharma.  

Vedic religion or Santana Dharma has no founder, whereas Hinduism is identified with its founders.

Vedic religion or Santana Dharma is the world's oldest religion. Sanatana Dharma encourages people to seek the ultimate truth and each individual must realize this truth through his or her own systematic effort. The Upanishads are based on the insights of the sages and seers and serve primarily as a guidebook. One has to accept Ultimate reality as Brahman or God.

The Aryans of North India were later influenced by the Dravidic-Mundic natives giving birth to Hinduism. Of course, in later centuries other peoples also invaded/migrated bringing other influences/mixing. 

The Aryans associated with the Rig Veda and Sapta Sindhu were definitely not Hindu because they did not follow the Hindu caste system, they ate beef, sacrificed cows, culturally were closer to Avestan Iranians, and forbade idolatry, etc. Also, not a single Hindu idol/temple has been excavated from the Rig Vedic Aryan period. 

As per Prof. Norman Brown:~ “The evidence of the Rig Veda shows that during the centuries when the Aryans were occupying Punjab and composing the hymns of the Rig Veda, the northwest part of the subcontinent was culturally separate from the rest of India. The closest cultural relations of the Indo-Aryans at that period were with the Iranians, whose language and sacred texts are preserved in the various works known as the Avesta, in inscriptions in Old Persian, and in some other scattered documents. So great is the amount of material common to the Rig Veda Aryans and the Iranians that the books of the two peoples show common geographic names as well as deities and ideas”.

AS per A. L. Stravrianos on the non-Hindu nature of Rig Vedic Aryans:~ "The word Veda means knowledge. There were originally four Vedas, but the most important is the Rigveda, which is also the oldest. The Rigveda is a primary source for the study of the early Aryans; it is, in essence, a collection of 1028 hymns arranged in ten books. Per the Vedas, Aryans worshiped elements of nature in personified forms, and idolatry was forbidden. 

 "In Rig Veda, the Gods of Dyaus are the same as the Greek Zeus (Roman Jupiter), Mitra is the same as the Graeco-Roman Mithras, Ushas is the same as the Greek Eos (Roman Aurora), and Agni is the same as the Graeco-Roman Ignis. 

"The image of the Aryans that emerges from Vedic literature is that of a virile people, fond of war, drinking, chariot racing, and gambling. Their god of war, Indra, was an ideal Aryan warrior: ‘he dashed into battle joyously, wore golden armor, and was able to consume the flesh of three hundred buffaloes and drink three lakes of liquor at one time. 

"When they first arrived in South Asia the Aryans were primarily pastoralists. Their economic life centered around their cattle and wealth was judged based on the size of herds. As the newcomers settled in fertile river valleys, they gradually shifted more to agriculture. They lived in villages consisting of many related families. Several villages comprised a clan, and several clans a tribe, at the head of which was the king. The king’s authority depended on his personal prowess and initiative and was limited by the council of nobles, and in some tribes by the freemen. 

"The outstanding characteristic of this early Aryan society was its basic difference from the later Hinduism. Cows were not worshiped but eaten. Intoxicating spirits were not forsaken but joyously consumed. There were classes but no castes, and the priests were subordinate to the nobles rather than at the top of the social pyramid. In short, Aryan society resembled much more the contemporary Indo-European societies than it did Hinduism that was to develop in later centuries in the Gangetic Valley."

 
Further supports how a few Aryans who later migrated eastward towards India slowly became Hindu because of Dravidic-Mundic influences: - ”The castes were hardened by the time the Aryans occupied the middle land i.e., the Gangetic Valley and distinguished themselves from their brethren in Sind and the Punjab who were despised by them for not observing the rules of caste .... and for their non-Brahmanical character.” (Sindhi Culture, By U.T. Thakur)

 “While some Aryans had by now expanded far into India, their old home in the Punjab, Sind, and the Northwest was practically forgotten. Later Vedic literature mentions it rarely and then usually with disparagement and contempt, as an impure land where sacrifices are not performed.” (The Wonder that was India, By A.L. Bhasham) 

Dr. Gurupdesh Singh: ~ "From geographical information in the Rig Veda, the Vedic Period (1500-500 BC) was confined to the northwest. The hymns composed by Vedic mystics/poets of the Northwest (Saptha Sindhva) tell that the Vedic peoples worshipped non-Brahmanical Gods (Indra, Varuna, Mitra), ate cows, elected their chiefs, drank liquor, considered the Punjab rivers to be sacred, and refer to people living in the south in the Gangetic region as 'Dasyas'! None of the Gangetic Brahmanical Gods (e.g Ram, Krishna, Vishnu, Brahma, etc.) are mentioned in Rig Veda hymns nor do they appear in connected Aryan Avestan texts and Hittite tablets. Avestan terms for soldiers ('rathaestar') and citizens ('vastriyo') are similar to Vedic-derived terms (Kshatriyas, Vaishyas) but the Avestan term for the priest ('athravan') is not even close to 'Brahmanas'. Moreover, central Gangetic religious texts like the Mahabharata and VarnaAshramDharma of Manu call the Vedic Aryans in Saptha Sindhva 'mlechas', 'Sudra' and 'vratyas'; 'forbid Brahmins' from even visiting the northwest country ('Vahika-desa'), and depict dark Dravidian Gods like Krishna fighting and defeating Vedic Aryan Gods like Indra (Mahabharata). Similarly, the Rig Veda contains taboos and injunctions against the 'dasya-varta' region to the south of Saptha Sindhva and praises Indra (god of the thunderbolt) for victories over 'dasya-purahs' (dasya cities).

"Both early Rig Vedic and Gangetic Puranic sources clearly point to ethnic, cultural, and religious differences and a 'clash of civilizations and nations' at the Ganga indicating that the Vedic people and culture of the Northwest did not accept the Gangetic priests, their Gods, Shastras, religion, culture and Brahmanical caste ideology. The eastern Gangetic heartland is not only historically a separate region, but geographically resides over 1500 miles to the southeast of the Saptha Sindhva country. Uptil the advent of Mohammed Ghori in the 13th century, the northwest was politically unified with South Asia for only 92 years under the Mauryas (out of 27 centuries) since the start of Saptha Sindhva’s Vedic period (1500 BC).

"A few Vedic tribes from Saptha Sindhva broke Rig Vedic norms and migrated southward. These numerically outnumbered groups expanding into the Trans-Gangetic region near the end of the Vedic period (8-6th century BC) tried to use the indigenous Dravidian priesthood to entrench themselves as the new ruling order. Within a few generations of acquiring control over the foreign Gangasthan, the minority Vedic tribes were usurped by the indigenous 'borrowed' priesthood; their Aryan religion, Gods, and customs were mostly deposed and supplanted with indigenous Gangetic Gods and mythologies,  and their new social order (varna or color based) replaced with the pre-existing profession (jati) based Brahmanical caste system ('chatur-varna' ). Through religious manipulation and intrigue, the Vedic in-comers to Gangasthan were usurped and made to surrender their political rule and soon pigeon-holed into becoming the loyal obedient chowkidars of their 'superior' Dravidic Brahmanas." 

Now coming to idolatry which is an integral part of Hinduism, there is clear evidence of early Aryans rejecting it:~

 “They are enveloped in darkness, in other words, are steeped in ignorance and sunk in the greatest depths of misery who worship the uncreated, eternal prakrti~the material cause of the world~in place of the All-pervading God, but 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, 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. 

Yajur Veda 32:3:~The Supreme Spirit that pervades the universe can have no material representation, likeness, or image. 

Also, early Aryans had a Monist belief in worshipping elements of nature (in non-idolatrous personified forms): “There is only one God, worship God in truth” (Rig Veda, Vol. 6, Hymn 45 vs 16) and “Do not worship anyone besides God ” (Rig Veda Bk. 8, Hymn 1, Vs 1)

Then there is clear evidence in the Rig Veda that Aryans regularly ate beef and sacrificed cows for religious purposes which are strictly forbidden in Hinduism:~

Hymn CLXIX of the Rig Veda says: ~ "May the wind blow upon our cows with healing; may they eat the herbage ... Like-colored various-hued or single-colored whose names through sacrifice are known to Agni, Whom the Angirases produced by Ferbvour - vouschsafe to these, Parjanya, great protection. Those who have offered to the Gods their bodies whose varied forms are all well known to Soma" [The Rig Veda (RV), translated by Ralph H. Griffith, New York, 1992, p. 647].

In the Rig Veda (RV: VIII.43.11):~ Agni is described as "fed on ox and cow" suggesting that cattle were sacrificed and roasted in the fire. 

Rigveda (10/85/13) says:~  “On the occasion of a girl’s marriage oxen and cows are slaughtered”, and Rigveda (6/17/1) states that:~ “Indra used to eat the meat of cow, calf, horse, and buffalo.” 

Quoting from Rigveda, historian H. H Wilson writes, “The sacrifice and consumption of horse and cow appear to have been common in the early periods of the Aryan culture.”

 Conclusion:~

Every religion is identified with a set of beliefs and customs making it distinct and recognizable from others, including Hinduism.

Different people and different religions can claim their beliefs and customs evolving, but when a change occurs it represents a new identity. For example, Catholic Christianity is not the same religion as ancient Roman Paganism. Therefore, since the Vedic religion or Sanatana Dharma was very different from Hinduism's beliefs and customs, Vedic people cannot be Hindus. Hinduism was born in later centuries.  Vedic people never call themselves Hindus. 

Hinduism is based on myths and thus people of India are unaware of the facts 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 rituals and conduct-oriented practices has been contributed largely by the Orthodox priests to suit their convenience!

Vedas are in the Vedic language which was a high-class language. Rig Veda (excluding chapters II and X) were written before the Christian Era in the Vedic language.  Vedic language is not Sanskrit.  It is the same language in which the Zoroastrian Scripture Zend Avesta is written – a form of Persian language.  All the other scriptures of India are written in Sanskrit.  

These include Rig Veda Chapter II and X and the Upanishads, Brahmanas, Puranas, and the Vedantas.  These were written during the Christian Era after the Thomas ministry. As the use of this language diminished, it became a tough language for the commoners. The priests, who were supposed to be an expert in this language, translated it into the Sanskrit language and manipulated the meanings in time, and gradually, all the practices changed.

The DaVita, Vedanta borrows the concept from Abrahamic religions, such as Eternal Damanation (of certain souls destined to hell forever) which goes against the belief of most Vedanta schools, which state that soul attains liberation. 

It looks like the creator-creation theory is also borrowed from Abrahamic religion and on the base, a new belief system has been introduced giving it a Vedic outlook and propagating all non-Vedic rituals and worships by someone in the past.  

St. Thomas is said to have come to India to spread Christianity in the first century AD. It first spread among the people of the Malabar coast and in areas near present-day Madras.

There is a total discontinuity in the concept of God before and after the entry of St, Thomas.  As one goes in deeper into the annals of religious history then we become aware of the fact that the Vedic gods were personifications of Nature and their worship essentially sacrifices to these Natural Forces to appease them.  All of a sudden by the first century, we encounter Vedantas.  Vedanta literally means “End of the Vedas,” though it is today interpreted as "the essence of Vedas."

 Vedanta, which appeared as theological discourses, presents a supreme Godhead, “Para Brahman’.  Such an idea was not even remotely conceivable in the Vedic context.  

New Gods like Maheshwar and Vishnu appeared.  The concept of Maheshwar.  Vishnu means Sky or Heavens.   Vishnu simply means God of Heaven lies or one who pervades everything.   Then we have the concept of incarnation – God taking flesh in human form to save humanity.  All these suddenly appeared after the entry of St, Thomas.

This was also the time when most of the Vedic gods passed into oblivion. Their place was taken by the trinity of gods, with Brahma as the creator, Vishnu the preserver, and Shiva the destroyer. It is believed that when evil is rampant, various incarnations of Vishnu enter the world of men to save them. Krishna is one such 'avatar'. 

There are many contradictions, Brahma Vishnu and Maheshwar are the three main GODs but they are one. Brahma is the creator of this universe (Generator), Vishnu is responsible for the smooth conduct of the same (sustainer), & Maheshwar is the Destroyer! But if you go and read Vishnu Purana, he is characterized as the supreme power.

Further, due to many castes and sub-castes prevailing in the society, some more rules and principles were added for the benefit of these priests. Can you imagine how would you get rid of the sin you committed by killing a cat? You will have to make a golden cat weighing equal to the dead cat and hand over this golden cat to the priest chanting for the purification of an individual soul! Hinduism is different from the Vedic religion.

Vedic religion was modified and reintroduced with new add-ons by Sage Sankara a great Advaita  Sages to uplift the Vedic culture, and Santana Dharma (Hinduism), which was in ruins in the clutches of Buddhism. 18 Puranas are introduced in the name of  Sage Veda Vyasa. 

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

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

Yajurveda – chapter- 32:~  God is Supreme Spirit has no ‘Pratima’ (idol) or material shape. God cannot be seen directly by anyone. God pervades all beings and all directions. Thus, Idolatry does not find any support from the Vedas.

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)

Vedas itself declares: May ye never accept another God in place of the Atman nor worship other than the Atman? Thus, to know the real God Self-realization is necessary. Self-realization is God-realization. Self-realization itself is real worship.

Brihadaranyaka Upanishad: ~ Brahman (God) is in the form of the Athma, and it is indeed Athma itself.

People, who worship the belief of God, are hallucinating that they become one with such God.

God is the Supreme Being the One eternal homogeneous essence, indivisible consciousness, and intelligence, which is beyond form, time, and space. Which the Sages describe in a variety of ways through diverse words.

Bhagavad Gita: ~ ‘All those whose intelligence has been stolen by material desires, they worship many Gods. (7- Verse -20)

Only the path of wisdom leads the seeker of truth on his journey to the ultimate realization of the true nature of the Universal Essence, which is the Soul. The Soul is present in the form of consciousness.

Bhagavad Gita: 7: 19:~ "Such a man who has attained true knowledge, the knowledge of Self, the knowledge of Atman, worships ‘Self’ as~ Atman (God in truth) alone exists~ everything is Atman, there exists nothing except Atman. Such a man is extremely rare."

Bhagavad Gita: ~ Brahmano hi pratisthaham ~ Brahman (God in truth) 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.

Lord Krishna says Ch ~V: ~ “Those who know the Self in truth.". The last two words (tattvataha) are usually ignored by pundits, but they make all the difference between the ordinary concept of God and the truth about God. 

Remember:~

The dualistic worship of "God” is only for the ignorant populace. The God in truth is only Atman, the  Self. In reality, there is no duality, no differentiation. Only Atman exists.  

The Vedas reveal ONE GOD whereas Hinduism is filled with 33crores of gods Vedas reveals God as Spirit (Atman or Brahman) and no form whereas Hinduism worships God in the form of various non-Vedic idols of gods and goddesses are barred by Vedas.

Vedas say that God does not have any form and exists as light, but in Hinduism, people idol worship their inherited personal God. 

It indicates clearly all the gods with form and attributes are mere imaginations based on the false self.  The ideas of conceptual gods are a reality based on the false self within the false experience.  

Thus, all the belief systems are based on the false self. Thus, their idea of God is merely a belief based on their religious doctrine. In Advaita Lord means Atman and Atman mean Brahman.
  

If people who indulge in god or guru glorification are not Advaitins because they have accepted the belief of God as true God and they forget the true God is Atman their true identity, which exists without the body and the experience of the world.

If God exists, as he does for religionists and yogis, and exists separately from them, then there is duality, which always implies a contradiction. From the ultimate point of view God is merely a belief or an idea, a thought, or an object, therefore the self or witness, contradicts God.

When there are two, one thought contradicts another for one thought comes at one moment, and the other at another moment, both moments contradict; one cannot say they are identical. He cannot find non-contradiction in this universe.

One the ultimate point of view the individualized God does not exist, because his existence implies that one is different from Him. Any kind of difference means contradiction. Nothing whatsoever other than the consciousness exists thus for non-dualists the consciousness itself is the ultimate truth and the ultimate truth is God. Nonduality means the negation of all thought.

The truth is not only that which is beyond contradiction but also that in which is no possibility of contradiction. Such a state can only be realized as non-duality, where there is no second thing other than consciousness. The illustration for that is deep sleep but sleep is not the ultimate reality. It is merely an analogy.

Brihad Upanishad says ~ "If you think there is another entity whether man or God there is no truth." This is the teaching since time immemorial of those who have inquired into the truth.

Consciousness alone which is permanent and eternal, unchanging in the changing world is a  reality. 

People hear of Brahman or the ultimate truth. People can only imagine it. One requires words only to distinguish between is there and not there, but he can’t posit either of reality because his saying so is only an idea, not reality. 

The ultimate truth is beyond words. Words are of use, however, as a thorn to pull out the thorn of other words that hinder knowledge.

Intellectually knowing the truth is only an imagination, whereas realizing the truth is knowing it as such.

The religious orthodoxy misleads the seekers of truth, therefore, the seeker of truth has to verify the truth on his own by reason based on the consciousness as the Self and then only accept the uncontradictable truth.  

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. 

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. 

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 Vaishnava, 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. And all Hindus indulge in non-Vedic practices barred by the Vedas introduced by the different founders of the different sects of Hinduism.

 Sruti is made the final or exclusive authority in apara Vidya and for supporting the tenet of the CAUSAL relation or creatorship of Brahman, Nirguna Brahman = the "Absolute beyond qualities," which can be defined only in a negative way. For the Sankarian school = the Ultimate Reality, higher than the Lord. i.e. of Saguna or apara Brahman ... The support of Scriptural Revelation is, therefore, absolutely necessary for this hypothesis of cosmology, this Saguna or apara (= inferior) Brahman, but not for the absolute truth of Nirguna Brahman.

The Sruti itself says: "This Atma is NOT to be attained by a study of the Vedas.  (Katha Upanishad I, 2, 23.)     

Therefore, all the non-Vedic add-ons and attribute-based knowledge, which is inferior, have to be bifurcated and excluded to know the ultimate truth.  The seeker of truth has to drop all the inferior knowledge based on the attributes and go beyond Vedas to understand assimilate and realize the ultimate truth or Brahman.  

One has to go beyond Vedas means to go beyond religion. Going beyond religion means, going beyond the concept of God.  Thus, going beyond Veda, religion and conceptual God means going beyond illusion.   That is the end of Vedas (Veda –antha). :~Santthosh Kumaar 

Sage Sankara's system of Advaita does not need the support of any Scripture or Revelation like the Vedas.+

Sage Sankara's system of Advaita does not need the support of any Scripture or Revelation like the Vedas. The Srutis may all disappear, yet will his school stand. Since it is based, not upon the varying theological fancies, which are as numerous as the sands of the sea, but upon reason, the common heritage of all mankind, irrespective of color or creed or clime.

Sage Sankara:~ 'Like a servant who carries a lamp in front of you to find your way, and you have found it, so becomes the Veda to that person. What is the Veda? ~ utterances of those who have known the Truth. Here is one who has known the Truth; why should he or she depend upon the Veda further? Actual realization takes you beyond books. At a certain stage, books become a botheration. The Upanishad itself says that the 'words are only so much distraction for such minds.

Sage Sankara says: ~ ‘What is accepted without a proper inquiry will not lead to the final Goal. (Commentaries on Vedanta Sutra)

Without verification, nothing has to be accepted as truth.

That is why Sage Sankara himself says: ~ VC 59. The study of the Scriptures is useless so long as the highest Truth is unknown, and it is equally useless when the highest Truth has already been known.

60. The Scriptures, consisting of many words are a dense forest that merely causes the mind to ramble. Hence men of wisdom should earnestly set about knowing the true nature of the Self.

61. For one who has been bitten by the serpent of Ignorance, the only remedy is the knowledge of Brahman. Of what avail are the Vedas and (other) Scriptures, Mantras (sacred formulae), and medicines to such a one?

It is not that one should pore over the ancient scriptures. There is no need to study first, and then realize. One has to realize first, then only he will know ‘what is the truth’ and ‘what is untruth’. One has to make his discoveries through the process of rational thinking.

That is why Sage Sankara says:~ V C65- As a treasure hidden underground requires (for its extraction) competent instruction, excavation, the removal of stones and other such things lying above it, and (finally) grasping, but never comes out by being (merely) called out by name, so the transparent Truth of the Self, which is hidden by Maya and its effects, is to be attained through the instructions of a knower of Brahman, followed by reflection, meditation and so forth, but not through perverted arguments.

Sage Sankara says:~ The scriptures dealing with rituals, and rewards are therefore addressed to an ignorant person. Thus, the rituals are meant for ignorant people.

Sage Sankara: ~ "Though I wear these robes of a Sanyasin, it is only for the sake of bread."

~ This shows he was wearing the religious robe only for the sake of bread." Thus, it means those who are wearing religious robes for the sake of bread.

All the rituals based on the false belief of Gods will not yield any fruits and they are meant for the ignorant populace who are unable to grasp the God beyond the form, time, and space.

One of Sage Sankara’s missions was to wean people away from a ritualistic approach advocated by Mimamsakas and to project wisdom (jnana) as the means of liberation in the light of Upanishad teachings.

Sage Sankara criticized severely the ritualistic attitude and those who advocated such practices. However, the Orthodox texts that combined rituals with wisdom (jnana_karma_samucchaya) more in favor of the Mimamsaka position came into vogue, projecting Sage Sankara as the rallying force of the doctrine.

That is why Sage Sankara:~ (11) As regards the rituals, Sage Sankara says, the person who performs rituals and aspires for rewards will view himself in terms of the caste into which he is born, his age, the stage of his life, his standing in society, etc. In addition, he is required to perform rituals all through his life. However, the 'Self' has none of those attributes or tags. Hence, the person who superimposes all those attributes on the changeless, eternal Self and identifies the Self with the body is a confusing one for the other; and is, therefore, an ignorant person. The scriptures dealing with rituals, rewards, etc. are therefore addressed to an ignorant person. -Adhyasa Bhashya

Sage Sankara:~ (11.1) This ignorance (mistaking the body for Self) brings in its wake a desire for the well-being of the body, aversion for its disease or discomfort, fear of its destruction, and thus a host of miseries(anartha). This anartha is caused by projecting karthvya(“doer” sense) and bhokthavya (object) on the Atman. Sage Sankara calls this adhyasa. The scriptures dealing with rituals, rewards, etc. are, therefore, he says, addressed to an ignorant person. -Adhyasa Bhashya

Sage Sankara:~ (11.2) In short, a person who engages in rituals with the notion “I am an agent, doer, thinker”, according to Sage Sankara, is ignorant, as his behavior implies a distinct, separate doer/agent/knower; and an object that is to be done/achieved/known. That duality is Avidya, an error that can be removed by Vidya. -Adhyasa Bhashya

Sage Sankara: ~ (12) Sage Sankara affirming his belief in one eternal unchanging reality (Brahman) and the illusion of plurality, drives home the point that Upanishads deal not with rituals but with the knowledge of the Absolute (Brahma Vidya) and the Upanishads give us an insight into the essential nature of the Self which is identical with the Absolute, the Brahman. -Adhyasa Bhashya

No conceptual God can exist, apart from consciousness. People are not aware of the fact that there is no individual God that can exist, apart from the Soul, which is in the form of consciousness.

Thus, the Soul or consciousness is the Self. If there is no consciousness, then there is a non-physical body, no ego, no universe, no religion, and no conceptual God.

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

And also:~

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Remember:~

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

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

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

Bhagavan Buddha was a Gnani, not his followers who follow Buddhism. Bhagavan Buddha's wisdom is lost in the diverse ideology of Buddhism. those who follow Hinduism or Buddhism will never be able to grasp the Advatic treasure hidden by the great Sages of truth.

Bhagavan Buddha as a constructive worker committed an error in failing to give the masses a religion, something tangible they could grasp, something materialistic, if symbolic that their limited intellect could take hold of, in addition to his ethics and philosophy. Here Sage Sankara was wiser and gave the religion, and rituals -to the ignorant populace, as well as Advaitic wisdom to the serious seekers of truth.

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

Tibetan and Chinese Buddhists who say that many Buddhas are living in spirit bodies and helping our earth from the spiritual world are still in the sphere of religious illusion, not the ultimate truth. Their statements are wrong. Every sage realizes that the only way to help mankind is to come down amongst them, for which he must necessarily take on flesh-body. When people are suffering how can he relieve their suffering unless he appears amongst them? When people are suffering how can he feed them from an unseen world whether their struggle is for material bread or for spiritual truth? No! He must be here actually in the flesh. It is impossible to help them in any other way and all talk of Shiva living on Mount Kailas in the spiritual body or Bhagavan Buddha in Nirmanakaya, the invisible body belongs to the realm of delusion or self-deception.

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-Gulbarga)

The Upanishads have the answer to the existence of the Atama.

Brihadaranyaka Upanishad: ~ Brahman (God in truth) is in the form of the Athma, and it is indeed Athma itself.

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

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), which exists forming the very substratum of all things (illusion or universe). : ~ Santthosh Kumaar

Do not accept any other God other than the Athma. The Athma is God in truth.+

Rig Veda: ~ 'Prajnanam Brahma'- Consciousness is the ultimate reality or Brahman or God in truth.

 

Do not accept any other God other than the Athma. The Athma is God in truth, Nothing is real but the Athma, which is present in the form of consciousness. 

Nothing matters but realizing God in truth. God in truth is everywhere and in everything. Let these words be inscribed in your subconscious.

 

God in truth is hidden by the illusory universe. God in truth alone is real and eternal and all else is an illusion. 

People are not aware that there is no religious God based on blind faith that can exist, apart from the Soul. The Soul is present in the form of consciousness. 

If there is no consciousness, then there is no physical body, no world, and no  Gods based on blind belief.

People think that there must be a creator of this universe. If one thinks that his body as the Self, there is a creator, but if one thinks, that the Soul as the Self, then nothing exists other than the Soul, which is present in the form of consciousness.

If one objectifies and sees a universe, then he is bound to see many things besides himself and postulate a God, the creator. 

Body, ego, and world rise and set together from, and into, the Soul, the Self.  The Soul is the source from which the mind (universe) rises and subsides.

If God is apart from the Soul, the Self, then He would be Self-less, that is, outside existence, that is, non-existent. 

The mind (universe) and its substance and its source (Soul) are one in essence.  That essence is consciousness.

Consciousness alone is real all else is merely an illusion created out of consciousness. Thus, consciousness is the ultimate truth or Brahman or God in truth. 

From the absolute standpoint, creation is an impossibility. The creation and creator theory is the false theory based on the false self. Whatever is based on the false self is bound to be a falsehood.

Creation is the very nature of the Soul, the Self. It is his inherent nature that simply emanates and flows from the Soul. But even this is only an appearance for in truth there's no creation at all. :~Santthosh Kumaar 

Sage Sankara says: - All the effects of ignorance, root, and branch, are burnt down by the fire of Self- knowledge.+

Sage Sankara says ~ “What is accepted without a proper inquiry will not lead a person to the final goal. On the contrary, such acceptance will result only in evil, something which is detrimental to our spiritual progress.

Sage Sankara says: - VC-47- All the effects of ignorance, root, and branch, are burnt down by the fire of knowledge, which arises from discrimination between these two—the Self and the non-self.

Until you think you are an individual separate from the world and the world existed prior to you and you are born in it afterward the ignorance will prevail as a reality. Till ignorance is there the universe prevails as reality.

Sage Sankara says: ~ “The exercise in discrimination between real and unreal and renunciation of the false is real meditation, then why you are indulging in other types of meditation.

Perfect understanding and realization of ‘what is what’ leads to Self-awareness. By holding onto theories one remains in the realm of duality. You have to mentally go on dropping what is not the truth through deeper Self-search. Finally when you become aware of the fact that, your ego, your body, and the world are one in essence then there is Self-awareness in the midst of duality.

Remember:~

Sage Sankara makes a distinction between the absolute view and the relative view of things.

Genuine philosophy must be independent of religion, that in Sage Sankara himself the 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 Brahma Sutras together with Sage Sankara's commentary thereon do not contain the higher wisdom. They are intended for those who are incapable of thinking rationally.

Sage Sankara's commentary on the Brahma Sutras is not on a philosophical basis, but on an orthodox and mystic basis, with an appeal to the Vedas as the final authority.

In Brahma Sutra Sage Sankara takes the position that there is another entity outside us, i.e. the wall really exists separately from the mind. This was because Sage Sankara explains in Manduka that those who study the Sutras are orthodox minds, intellectual children, hence his popular viewpoint to assist them. These people are afraid to go deeper because it means being heroic enough to refuse to accept Sruti, and God's authority, in case they mean punishment by God. A Gnani says the scriptures are for children, but wise seekers will think rationally.

In Brahma Sutras Sage Sankara takes for granted, and assumes that a world was created: He there mixes dogmatic theology with philosophy.

That God created the world is an absolute lie, nevertheless one will find Sage Sankara (commentary on Vedanta Sutras) clearly says this! He has to adapt his teachings to his audience, reserving the highest for philosophical minds.

The text of Brahma Sutras is based on religion and dogmatism, but in the commentary, Sage Sankara cleverly introduced some philosophy.

If it is objected that many Upanishads are equally dogmatic because they also begin by assuming Brahman, only a few Upanishads do not but prove Brahman at the end of a train of proof.

Scholars' translation of Brahma Sutras in Sacred Books of East must be read cautiously as he has not understood its highest sense, e.g. for Advaita, they wrongly put "Unity" instead of “Non-duality."

Sage Sankara gave religion, scholasticism, and yoga no less than philosophy, to the seeking world. He was great enough to be able to do so. His commentary on Manduka is pure philosophy, but many of his other books are presented from a religious standpoint to help those who cannot rise up to philosophy. :~Santthosh Kumaar

Ishopanishad: ~ “They are steeped in ignorance and sunk into the greatest depth of misery who worships the matter, instead of the All-Pervading God.+

All the orthodox Advaitins indulge and immerse themselves in a ritualistic-oriented lifestyle and follow the path of karma and Upasana which is meant for lower and middling intellect and not for realizing the Advaitic truth.

Many chose these orthodox scholars as their gurus. But these gurus are good for learning the conceptual Advaita meant for those Orthodox who believe their conduct-oriented lifestyle leads to Moksha [liberation]. the religious-based Advaita is not the means to acquire Self–knowledge or nondual wisdom.

Those who are seeking the truth have to do their own homework to acquire Self-knowledge or Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana.

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.

Vedas and Upanishads confirm the Soul, the Self, is present in the form of the Spirit or the consciousness.

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)

Sage Sankara’s Supreme Brahman 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 the description implies a distinction. Brahman cannot be distinguished from any other than It. In Brahman, there is not a 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.

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 the worshiping God and Goddess to acquire  Self-knowledge.

Ish Upanishad says:~ 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 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.

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."

It is necessary for the seeker to 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. :~Santthosh Kumaar