Sage Sankara’s mission was to wean people away from a ritualistic approach and to project wisdom as the means of liberation. +

One of Sage Sankara’s missions was to wean people away from a ritualistic approach advocated by Mimamsakas and to project wisdom (Gnana) 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 favour of the Mimamsaka position came into vogue, projecting Sage Sri, Sankara as the rallying force of the doctrine.

That is why Adhyasa Bhashya of 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.

The rituals mentioned in the karmakanda of the Vedas are sought to be negated in the jnanakanda which is also part of the same scripture. While the karmakanda enjoins upon you the worship of various deities and lays down rules for the same, the jnanakanda constituted by the Upanishads ridicules the worshipper of deities as a dim-witted person no better than a beast.

This seems strange, the latter part of the Vedas contradicting the former part. The first part deals throughout with karma while the second or concluding part is all about jnana. Owing to this difference, people have gone so far as to divide our scripture into two sections: the Vedas (that is the first part) to mean the karmakanda and the Upanishads (Vedanta) to mean the jnanakanda.

Vedanta it is that Lord Krishna teaches us in the Gita and in it he lashes out against the karmakanda. It is generally believed that the Buddha and Mahavira were the first to attack the Vedas. It is not so. Lord Krishna himself’ spoke against them long before Buddha and Mahavira.

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 in to deeper darkness. Instead spend that time moving forward towards Self-knowledge, which is one’s prime goal.

Understanding what is God is a not so easy. Religious people can only imagine God based on their beliefs.

From Vedic perspective, Lord Krishna is not Vedic God because Rig Veda says: May ye never accept another God in place of the Atman nor worship other than the Atman?"

That is why 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.

The 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)

It proves that the all-pervading Atman, which is present in the form consciousness, is God. in truth Thus, worshipping the form based Gods is meant for the ignorant populace who are incapable of the realizing the truth, which is beyond the form, time, and space.

The Vedas do not talk about idol worship. In fact, till about 2000 years ago followers of Vedism never worshipped idols. Idol worship was started by the followers of Buddhism and Jainism.

There is logic to idol worship. Vedas speak of one God that is the supreme self in i.e. Atman or Soul but Hinduism indulges in worshiping 60 million Gods.

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

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."- (Yajurveda 40:9.)

The 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. 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)

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

Rig Veda says 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."

Chandogya Upanishad: ~ 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.

Even Sage Sankara’s Supreme Brahman (God in truth) 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 beside it. It is destitute of difference, either external or internal. Brahman cannot be described because description implies a distinction. Brahman cannot be distinguished from any other than It. In Brahman, there is not the distinction of 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.

Sage Sankara: ~"That which permeates all, which nothing transcends and which, like the universal space around us, fills everything completely from within and without, that Supreme non-dual Brahman (God in truth) ~ that thou art."

Sage Sankara’s Nirguna Brahman is based on Vedas. The Saguna Brahman has no Vedic sanction.

Thus, it clearly indicates the Vedic God is without form and attributes and ever free.

Vedic Gods hardly have any significance in the present-day Hindu belief system. The Gods and Goddesses important to the Hindus of today are Ram, Krishna, Kali, Ganesh, Hanuman, Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva, and the respective consorts of the last three, namely, Saraswati, Lakshmi, and Shakti. None of these deities figured prominently in the Vedic pantheon, and some of them are clearly non-Vedic. : ~ Santthosh Kumaar

What does Buddhism say about rebirth.+

 What does Buddhism say about rebirth? 

Definition. Rebirth is an eschatological notion that denotes a continuation of life after death. According to the Buddhist doctrine, the cycle of rebirth has no beginning and is maintained by ignorance, craving, attachment, and the fruition of the karmic forces that determine the nature of the future exisst

Aatish Palekar 

The present life of a person is the result of his past life, and the future birth depends upon the present life karmas, depending on their karmas. According to the doctrine of Karmas, every man is responsible for his actions.  The actions must bear fruits. The future of every individual depends on his present actions.

 

According to Karma theory, the fruits of the actions are according to the character of the actor. 

If someone has committed sin, he will have to suffer for it in the hell. But if some good man has by chance committed some evil action, he will get rid of it after suffering a little in this very life.

 

When everything is predetermined according to Karmas, then how can the individual effect any change it.

According to Karma theory is not mechanical. Though the present is determined by the past, the future is free and depends on our will. 

If anyone says that the man must bear the fruits of his karmas, there is no religious life in that condition, nor is there any opportunity for the absolute destruction of suffering. 

But if someone says that the reward which a man gets is according to his action, the priests! in that condition, there is religious life and the opportunity of the destruction of all suffering. As a matter of fact, if the doctrine of Karma is mechanical then there is hardly any place for religion and ethics in human life. The doctrine of Karma shows an order in the field of spiritual development as well as that of the terrestrial process. It does not lessen the importance of efforts and responsibility. The philosophy of Buddha is against absolute determinism as well as against absolute indeterminism.

In Buddhist philosophy, the succession of the world has been called Bhava-Chakra. In their cycle, the chain of cause and effect is always operating. It is this effect that has been emphasized in the doctrine of dependent origination. Both birth and death are two links in the same chain. As the old is destroyed, the new takes birth. Not only human beings but all living beings are caught in this cycle of the world.

But there is an escape from this worldly cycle. According to the Buddhist philosophy the Karma ceases to have any effect on the ultimate spiritual status. In that stage, the karmas and their effects are destroyed forever and the man rises above both merits and demerits. After attaining liberation the actions cease, but this does not mean inactivity. Really speaking, al Karmas do not bear fruit, but only those Karmas result into effects that are promoted by the passions Originating in ignorance. After the attainment of liberation, the Karmas remain, but they bear no fruit as the burnt seeds do not sprout in the plants.

>> Modules Anywhere >>>-->

Rebirth in Buddhist Philosophy: Buddha does not believe in any permanent soul. Consciousness is an eternal process, in which there is the relation of antecedent and subsequent between different movements. But there is no unchanging, immutable soul behind his process. Hence, logically there is no place for rebirth in Buddhist philosophy. 

After death, the samskaras of the Jivas remain. These samskaras are according to his karmas and it is due to these that a link between one birth and another is maintained. This Sanskara is expressed in the last thought of a dying person. Along with this power of Karma, attachment or clinging is also required. This upadan is the power that is the cause of new birth according to old karmas. Without it the Karmas themselves have no power. After the attainment of liberation, the attachment is destroyed and Upadan annihilated, resulting into the negation of the rebirth. There is no similarity between the past and the present individual except that the new is according to the karmas of the old. Sometimes even consciousness has been admitted as remaining after death. Whatever we are or whatever we have thought is the result of it, consciousness has been rightly conceived as the essence of our soul. In fact, this proves the close relation between consciousness, action, thought, and will. After the attainment of Nirvana, one is liberated both from consciousness as well as from actions.

Remember:~

Those who follow the Karma theory are not qualified for Self-knowledge Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana.

Mundaka Upanishad:~ These performers of karma do not know the Truth, which is hidden by the illusion.

The karma theory belongs to religion and yoga and it has nothing to do with Spirituality or Adyathma.

Advaitic wisdom is pure spirituality. The karma theory is based on the individual experience of birth, life, death, and the world as a reality whereas Sage Sri, Sankara says the world is an illusion.

Thus, whatever karma is performed within the illusory world is bound to be an illusion. The karma theory is meant for the ignorant who are the followers of the Advaitic orthodox path. Advaitic orthodox path is meant for the ignorant populace. Those who follow the Karma theory are not qualified for Self-knowledge or Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana.

According to Advaita Vedanta, the Veda addresses itself to two kinds of audiences:~

1. The ordinary ones who desire the transitory heaven and other pleasures obtained as a result of ritual sacrifices,

2. The more advanced seeker who seeks to know Brahman.

Thus, the Purva mimam.sa, with its emphasis on the karma kanda of the Vedas, is meant for the first audience, to help lead its followers along the way.

The Vedanta, with its emphasis on the jnana kanda, is meant for those who wish to go beyond such transient pleasures.

Sage Sankara: ~ “Action (karma) cannot destroy ignorance, for it is not in conflict with or opposed to ignorance. Knowledge does verily destroy ignorance as light destroys deep darkness. -Atma Bodha

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.

In the theistic analysis, human life and behavior are explained based on the theory of karma, which sets the cycle of rebirths into motion. All actions, good or bad, create their own karmic residues called vasanas, which exhibit their results over a period of time.

The karma which has already started taking fruit is called Prarabdha Karma. This is the karma that is responsible for the current birth. The accumulated karma which is yet to take fruit is called sanchit karma. As long as the cycle of rebirth continues, more karma will be done in the future, and this is called Agamin karma. Liberation (moksha) is the way out of this endless cycle.

The most valuable contribution of Sage Sankara is that he gained general consciousness on the issue that the authoritative explanation of Upanishads, Bhagavad Gita, and Brahma Sutra was the final say in the matter of religion. Anything that goes contrary to the trio is not authentic. He also made a clear distinction between Vedas and Upanishads in his commentary on Gita. He stated that the Karma Kanda of the Vedas deals with the injunctions relating to the performance of duties and actions. These are for ordinary householders.

The path of religion, the path of yoga, and the path of wisdom were intended for different classes of people. The 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 the inner urge to know the truth and it is not for those who are immersed in earthly desires.

Sage Sankara’s whole teaching can be summed up in one sentence, ‘There is nothing else but Brahma. He says that the Absolute Existence, Absolute Knowledge, and Absolute Bliss are real. The universe is not real.

Sage Sage Sankara - Brahma and Atman are one. The ultimate and the Absolute Truth is the Self, which is one though appearing as many in different individuals. The individual has no reality. Only the Self is real; the rest, mental and physical, are but passing appearances.

In fact, Sage Sankara states a paradox- the world is and is not. It is neither real nor unreal. It leads us to recognize the existence of Maya.

Sage Sankara gave religion, ritual, and karma to the ignorant masses, as well as Advaitic wisdom to those who are seriously seeking the truth of their true existence.

Those who have taken the Path of wisdom or the Atmic path should discard the karma theory which is meant for the orthodox ignorant populace.

The person who is based on the individual experience of birth, life, and death, is trying to find the meaning of life.

There is no meaning or purpose in life because life is merely happening within the dualistic illusion. Thus, the Karma theory based on the physical entity is based on the birth, life, and death, which is part and parcel of the dualistic illusion. :~Santthosh Kumaar