Advaita Vedanta

[53] It is also called māyāvāda by Vaishnava opponents, akin to Madhyamaka Buddhism, due to their insistence that phenomena ultimately lack an inherent essence or reality,[54][55][56][57] According to Richard King, a professor of Buddhist and Asian studies, the term Advaita first occurs in a recognizably Vedantic context in the prose of Mandukya Upanishad.

[60] Stephen Phillips, a professor of philosophy and Asian studies, translates the Advaita containing verse excerpt in Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, as "An ocean, a single seer without duality becomes he whose world is Brahman.

[80][35][note 21] Yet, the Advaita-tradition also emphasizes human effort, a path of Jnana Yoga with a progression of study and training to realize one's true identity as Atman/Brahman and attain moksha.

[120] According to Sengaku Mayeda, "in no place in his works [...] does he give any systematic account of them,"[119] taking Atman/Brahman to be self-evident (svapramanaka) and self-established (svatahsiddha), and "an investigation of the means of knowledge is of no use for the attainment of final release.

[web 7] According to Rambachan, criticising Vivekananda, Shankara states that the knowledge of Brahman can only be obtained from inquiry of the Shruti, and not by Yoga or samadhi, which at best can only silence the mind.

[41] The Vivekachudamani, traditionally attributed to Shankara but post-dating him,[130] "conceives of nirvikalpa samadhi as the premier method of Self-realization over and above the well-known vedantic discipline of listening, reflection and deep contemplation.

[16][163][web 10] "Tvam" refers to one's real I, pratyagatman or inner Self,[166] the "direct Witness within everything,"[15] "free from caste, family, and purifying ceremonies,"[167] the essence, Atman, which the individual at the core is.

[3] Yet, the knowing self has various experiences of reality during the waking, dream and dreamless states,[202] and Advaita Vedānta acknowledges and admits that from the empirical perspective there are numerous distinctions.

[214] While closely related to Samkhya,[215][17] the Advaita Vedānta tradition rejects this dualism, instead stating that Reality cannot evolve from an inert, consciousness- and intelligence-less principle or essence.

"[243] One's real self is not the constantly changing body, not the desires, not the emotions, not the ego, nor the dualistic mind,[244][245][246] but the introspective, inwardly self-conscious "on-looker" (saksi),[247] which is in reality completely disconnected from the non-Atman.

[253] According to Candradhara Sarma, Turiya state is where the foundational Self is realized, it is measureless, neither cause nor effect, all pervading, without suffering, blissful, changeless, self-luminous,[note 5] real, immanent in all things and transcendent.

Manisha Panchakam, attributed to Adi Shankara:[web 16] In the Advaita tradition, consciousness is svayam prakāśa, "self-luminous,"[3][263][note 5] which means that "self is pure awareness by nature.

"[222] In the 20th century, this theory of mulavidya became a point of strong contention among Advaita Vedantins, with Satchidanandendra Saraswati arguing that Padmapada and Prakasatman had misconstrued Shanakara's stance.

[301] While Shankara took a realistic stance, and his explanations are "remote from any connotation of illusion," the 13th century scholar Prakasatman, founder of the influential Vivarana school, introduced the notion that the world is illusory.

[319] One, who is eager to realize this highest truth spoken of in the Sruti, should rise above the fivefold form of desire: for a son, for wealth, for this world and the next, and are the outcome of a false reference to the Self of Varna (castes, colors, classes) and orders of life.

The Upanishads, the Bhagavad Gitā and Brahma Sutras are the central texts of the Advaita Vedānta tradition, lending authority to the doctrines about the identity of Atman and Brahman and their changeless nature.

"[321] Nevertheless, states Koller, Advaita Vedantins did not entirely rely on revelation, but critically examined their teachings using reason and experience, and this led them to investigate and critique competing theories.

[335][333] The Brahmasutra (also called Vedānta Sutra, composed in 1st millennium BCE) accepted this in verse 1.1.4 and asserts the need for the Upanishadic teachings to be understood not in piecemeal cherrypicked basis, rather in a unified way wherein the ideas in the Vedic texts are harmonized with other means of knowledge such as perception, inference and remaining pramanas.

[338][339][340] Sankara is said to have organised the Hindu monks of these ten sects or names under four Maṭhas (Sanskrit: मठ) (monasteries), called the Amnaya Mathas, with the headquarters at Dvārakā in the West, Jagannatha Puri in the East, Sringeri in the South and Badrikashrama in the North.

[note 64] Philosophically, the Smarta tradition emphasizes that all images and statues (murti), or just five marks or any anicons on the ground, are visibly convenient icons of spirituality saguna Brahman.

The ultimate goal in this practice is to transition past the use of icons, then follow a philosophical and meditative path to understanding the oneness of Atman (Self) and Brahman – as "That art Thou".

[note 65] S. N. Dasgupta and Mohanta suggest that Buddhism and Advaita Vedānta represent "different phases of development of the same non-dualistic metaphysics from the Upanishadic period to the time of Śaṅkara.

[385] By contrast, in Advaita Vedānta and the other orthodox schools of Hinduism, the eternal, unchanging ultimate self (ātman) identical with Brahman is understood as the real observer, personal agent, and cognizer.

[360] Rāmāṉuja, a Hindu saint and founder of the Vishishtadvaita Vedānta school (12th century CE), similarly accused Ādi Śaṅkara of being a Prachanna Bauddha, that is, a "crypto-Buddhist",[391] and someone who was undermining the theistic Bhakti-oriented devotionalism.

[396][397] Shankara's theory posits that only Brahman and causes are metaphysical unchanging reality, while the empirical world (Maya) and observed effects are changing, illusive and of relative existence.

[454] Maṇḍana Miśra, an older contemporary of Shankara,[455] was a Mimamsa scholar and a follower of Kumarila, but also wrote a seminal text on Advaita that has survived into the modern era, the Brahma-siddhi.

"[343][479] Shankara's position was further established in the 19th and 20th century, when neo-Vedantins and western Orientalists, following Vidyaranya, elevated Advaita Vedanta "as the connecting theological thread that united Hinduism into a single religious tradition.

Michael S. Allen and Anand Venkatkrishnan note that Shankara is very well-studied, but "scholars have yet to provide even a rudimentary, let alone comprehensive account of the history of Advaita Vedānta in the centuries leading up to the colonial period.

[62] According to Andrew Nicholson, it was with the arrival of Islamic rule, first in the form of Delhi Sultanate and later the Mughal Empire, and the subsequent persecution of Indian religions, that Hindu scholars began a self-conscious attempts to define an identity and unity.

[515] Colonial era Indian thinkers, such as Vivekananda, presented Advaita Vedānta as an inclusive universal religion, a spirituality that in part helped organize a religiously infused identity.