How do you agree with Shankara that this world is illusory When the Upanishads say that all is Brahman?

What was the main feature of Shankara's Advaita philosophy?

Adi Shankara consolidated the Advaita Vedanta, an interpretation of the Vedic scriptures that was approved and accepted by Gaudapada and Govinda Bhagavatpada siddhānta (system). Continuing the line of thought of some of the Upanishadic teachers, and also that of his own teacher's teacher Gaudapada, (Ajativada), Adi Shankara expounded the doctrine of Advaita - a nondualistic reality.His system of thought can be summarized as:ब्रह्म सत्यं जगन्मिथ्या जीवो ब्रहैव नापरःBrahma satyaṃ jagat mithyā, jīvo brahmaiva nāparahBrahman is the only truth, the world is an illusion, and there is ultimately no difference between Brahman and individual selfThe above verse is only the half verse taken from Brahma Jnanavali MalaThe full verse isब्रह्म सत्यं जगन्मिथ्या जीवो ब्रहैव नापरःअनेन वेद्यं सच्छास्त्रमिति वेदान्तडि्ण्डिमः - - ब्रह्म ज्ञानावलीमाला - २०brahma satyam jaganmithyA jIvo brahmaiva nAparahanena vedyam sacchAstram iti vedAntaDiNDimah-Brahma Jnanavali mala- 2020. Brahman (ब्रह्म) is real, the universe is mithya (मिथ्या), it cannot be categorized as either real or unreal. The jiva (जीव) is Brahman (ब्रह्म) itself and not different. This should be understood as the correct SAstra (शास्त्र). This is proclaimed by Vedanta. -Brahma Jnanavali mala- 20This widely quoted sentence of his is also widely misunderstood. In his metaphysics, there are three tiers of reality with each one more real than the previous. The category illusion in this system is unreal only from the viewpoint of the absolutely real and is different from the category of the Absolutely unreal.His system of vedanta introduced the method of scholarly exegesis on the accepted metaphysics of the Upanishads, and this style was adopted by all the later vedanta schools. Another distinctive feature of his work is his refusal to be literal about scriptural statements and adoption of symbolic interpretation where he considered it appropriate. In a famous passage in his commentary on the Brahmasutra's of Badarayana, he says "For each means of knowledge {PramaNam} has a valid domain. The domain of the scriptures {Shabda PramaNam} is the knowledge of the Self. If the scriptures say something about another domain - like the world around us - which contradicts what perception {Pratyaksha PramaNam} and inference {Anumana PramaNam} (the appropriate methods of knowledge for this domain) tells us, then, the scriptural statements have to be symbolically interpreted..."Salient Features of his philosophy:The word 'Advaita' ( अद्वैत ) means non-duality. It is a philosophy which describes that there is only one reality and one truth i.e. Brahman. All else is not real, not eternal and is of transient nature. Brahman is changeless, formless, indivisible, unchanging, immutable, beyond guna-s (attributes), beyond the reach of 5 senses, mind and beyond the realms of mAyA (माया).Important Concepts of Advaita are1. Brahman Satyam2. Jagat MithyA3. Jiva and Brahman are not Different4. Brahman due to it's mAyA (माया) appears as this world.5. Everything else is also Brahman6. Atman is Sat-Chit-Ananda and not different from Brahman.7. Experience of Duality is due ot universal, natural error in perception, like seeing snake instead of rope.According ot Advaita, only Brahman is real and eternal. Though Maya nad Jadat are considered as anAdi (beginningless), they end in the state of Jnana (Atma Sthiti). There is no difference between Jiva and Brahman. Individual Self merges in Brahman. This is the salient Feature of Adi Shankara Advaita.Other schools of thought do not believe in Non-dual state as the final release. Like VisisTAdvaita of RAmAnuja says that Jiva-s are eternal and the relation between jiva and Brahman are like part and full i.e. Qualitatively same but quantitatively different.Other VAishnava schools of thought also do not agree with the non-dual state, as they believe that Jiva can never become Brahman. According to GAudiya VAishnava Philosphy, Jiva enjoys company of Krishnain VAikuntha and devotionally serives the Lord eternally.They consider this world as real. Even Shaiva Schools consider this world as real, as an expression of Shiva, though some schools like Kashmir Shaivism of Abhinav Gupta do consider non-dual state as the final release. It is only Advaita that considers this world as illusion (mithyA). This is the basic difference between other schools of thought and that of Adi Shankara.Vivarta VadaThe philospphy of Advaita is based on Vivarta VadaAccording to this philosphy, the rope in dark is mistaken or snake. Till one sees snake, one either runs away or takes it as a prisoner to perform some act or to eat it. So there is action of acceptanc or rejection (running away). But when one switches on the light, the reality which is rope is perceived, sa with this realization activity ceases. There is no more fear or any want.The rope was always snake, but in ignorance (darkness), it was wrongly perceived as snake. At all times snake was never a reality. But in times of ignorance, it was real, due to error in perception i.e. snake looked real. Similarly this world looks and feels real in ignorance. Once the curtain of ignorance is removed, what is left is pure Self.This is philosophy of Vivarta Vada adopted by Adi Shankara. The unique feature of this philosophy is that the snake after disappearing does not leave any trace, while on other philosophies like parinama vAda, the milk is irreversibly converted to curd (as adopted by Ramanuja).Main Philosophy: AdhyArOpa ApavAda - Consistent Traditional Teaching of Adi ShankaraThe real work of Adi Shankara was to pass on the traditional teaching, whihc he got from his Guru and his Guru's Guru GAuDapadAcharya and other ancient teachers like Brahmanandin, Dravidacharya and Upvarshacharya. This method was rediscovered by Swmai Sacchidanandendra Saraswati, Shankaracharya of Shringeri Math.This Traditional Teaching is called as adhyArOpa apavAda. AdhyArOpa means (False) superimposition and apavAda means to retraction or negate (the supreimposition). Hence adyArOpa apavAda means False Superimposition followed by it's retraction. This is found in Shankara BhASya of Bhagavad Gita 13.13 (in some versions it is 13.14. Adi Shankara did not comment one 1st verse and it is not found in most of advaita copies). It is also found in BG 9.5 and in Shankara BhASya on Mandukya Upanishad 7. This method of teaching is found in all 10 principle upanishads, commented by Adi Shankara.According ot this method, the false superimposition of being a witness is created. Later the superimposition of being a witness is also removed by saying that 'this Atman is neither being and non-being', etc. Since Brahman cannot be described whatsoever, no attributes attached ot it can be real. Hence, the attributes of being a witness are finally removed. This negative approach or path of negation is the only way ot teach that Brahman from which speech return before reaching it, mind cannot comprehend it. Hence it cannot be described.Jiva is connected with body and worldly objects. This is like mixture of milk and water. IT is impossible to separate milk from water. The only way ot separate is to ask us to be witness and thereby become separate from the creation, as by being involved in work and being attached ot body, one cannot know the true nature. To do so, attribute of witness and some more attributes of Brahman like infinite, bliss, peace, etc are taught.After one is separated from the Self, these attributes are removed, by saying, 'that which is neither being and non-being' BG 13.13, 'he (the Self) is neither this nor that' (Br. Up.. II.iii.6), etc in shruti-s. If one experiences peace or bliss, then still there is duality, as there is an experiencer who is separate from something that he is experiencing. There is no separate experiencer of bliss. Only Brahman remains. This is the traditional teaching, a path of neti-neti, meaning naa-iti, naa-iti (not this, not this), which ultimately leads to ajata vada, which says the world does not exists not does maya in Atma Sthiti, as taught by GAuDapadacharya. This is the highest truth proclaims GauDapadacharya in his karika (G.K. III.26).SummaryBeing a witness is like separating Milk from Water. This quality is attributed to Hansa (Swan). Later, the witness merges into Brahman or after negating everything that is Non-Self, what remains is just 'You' Brahman. The one who has achieved this state is called as ParamhansaTo sum up,be the witness, then transcend this world of Maya and merge in Brahman completely losing individual identity.

What is verb for agree?

The verb for agree is "to agree."

Which is correct i am agree with you or i agree with you?

"I agree with you."

What are teachings of Saint Ramanuja?

A very difficuly question, here is a very short introduction. Extensive reading is required to understand this fully. He explained the Vishta-Advita (Qualified Advaita) philosophy of Hinduism and the "Sri-Vaishnavite" world view. His primary teachings are as below : 1) Ramanuja does not agree with the Advita (Sri Shankara's View) that only the Para Brahman (God) is true and every thing else is Maya. He groups everything into 3 groups Chit (Sentient), A-Chit (Non-Sentient) & Eshwar (Para Brahman). He interprets Advaitic vedic verses such that, Chit & Achit constitute the Body of the Para Brahman. Hence Chit & Achit are not "Maya", but physically exits. Since "Chit & Achit" are the body - they are the "property" of of Para Brahman. And this Para Brahman who possesses the whole universe as his property is Advaitic, meaning there is no body to compare to him. He also id not "Nirguna" but has innumerable "Kalya Guna" or superior qualities such as Karunya (pity), etc. 2) The Para Brahman is Sriman Narayana. SriaPathitvam (husband of Sri) is one of the most guna's of the Para Brahman. Sri is the manifestation of the Para Braman's "Ahamtha" (that which singularly identifies Para Brahman" 2) Attaining Moksha is the purpose of any soul. By moksha , he refers the soul physically existing the known universe which is part of the the creation-distruction cycle to "Vikunta" , where the souls achieve "Samyapathi" with equality with Sriman Narayanam 8 of his gunas. I unfortunatly cannot recollect these 8 gunas now. 3) Any soul, in whatever body she might have taken, (man, women, animal, plant etc.,) can achieve moksha. There is no discrimination. 4) He mentioned that in Kali Yuga, there are at best 2 methods of attaining Moksha. Bhakti (love of God) and Prapatti (complete surrender to him). a) Bhakti is still dependent on the effort of the Bhakta, and she has to like the life as prescribed by the Vedas and think about God at the momment the soul leaves the body. Here the soul cannot be assured of Moksha at end of current birth. b) Prapatti (Saranagathi) is acceptance of our inability to adopt any other method of achieving moksha, and perform complete surrender to him. The most important concept in parpatti is faith. c) Prapatti has to be first to Sri (the mother) and then to Narayana (the father) for it to work. d) Prapatti needs to be performed through a Sri Vaishnava archayar who ar ea part of the guru parampara (guru-shiya parampara) of the 72 archaya's identified by Sri Ramanuja

I am agree or I agree with you?

i am agreed or i agree

What is the difference between you agree and you do agree?

какая разница между I agree и I do agree?

What is the future tense of agree?

The future tense is will agree.

What is the difference between agree to and agree with?

'Agree with' is used for a person 'Agree to' is used for a proposal. Example: I agree with you. He agreed to join me at lunch.

What is the different between do you agree are you agree?

"Do you agree" is a question asking for confirmation of agreement on a specific topic. "Are you agree" is grammatically incorrect and should be phrased as "Do you agree" instead.

What is the meaning of to agree to somthing in comparison to agree with?

To agree to something = to commit to an action. To agree with = to have the same opinion

What statement is grammatically correct I agree with your or I am agree with You?

The statement "I agree with you" is correct. "Am" is not needed in this context because "agree" already indicates the present tense.

What is the present tense of agree?

agree/agreesThey agree to have a meeting.She agrees to have a meeting.