Śamkara was one of the most influen2al thinkers in Vedānta philosophy.

He was a founder of Advaita

(non-dualis2c) Vedānta, explaining the unity of Brahman (the universal Self) and Ātman (the individual
Self). This viewpoint was later opposed by Dvaita (dualis2c) Vedanta, which taught that there is a
fundamental difference between Ātman and Brahman.
Vedānta is a school of Hindu philosophy based on the teachings of the Upanishads. The Upanishads are
ancient Hindu scriptures which cons2tute the final sec2on of the Vedas. Thus, the Upanishads have also
been called the Vedānta. Vedānta literally means “end of the Vedas.” Vedānta philosophy interprets and
develops the teachings of the Upanisads. The three main branches of Vedānta philosophy are: 1) Advaita
(i.e. non-dualism), represented by the teachings of Śamkara, 2) Visishtadvaita (i.e. qualified non-
dualism), represented by the teachings of Rāmanuja, and 3) Dvaita (i.e. dualism), represented by the
teachings of Mādhva.
Basic teachings of Advaita Vedānta include that Brahman (or ul2mate reality) is non-dual, that Brahman
and Ātman are a unity, that the appearance of plurality in the phenomenal world is illusory, and that
illusion (māyā) is the misinterpreta2on of appearance as reality. For Śamkara, Brahman is the one and
only reality. Brahman is Being, Consciousness, and Bliss, it is infinite, formless, and perfect, and is all-
inclusive and all-perceiving and is the eternal and unchanging Self.
Śamkara explains that Brahman cannot be expressed or described, because it transcends names,
classifica2ons, or characteriza2ons. It cannot be known by reasoning, but its existence may be
apprehended intui2vely. Śamkara contends that Brahman is the source of the Vedas, and that reading of
the Vedas is a means of right knowledge of Brahman. The absolute unity of Brahman transcends any
concepts of duality or plurality. Brahman is a universal reality which is indivisible. Brahman is all-
powerful and all-knowing. Brahman is beginningless and endless and is the source of all being.
Further, Śamkara explains that we can know that Brahman exists, just as we can know that the Self
exists. To know Brahman is to know the Self, and to know the Self is to know Brahman. Consciousness of
the existence of the Self is also consciousness of the existence of Brahman. Perfect knowledge is a true
understanding of the unity of the individual Self (i.e. Ātman) and the universal Self ([Link]).
According to Śamkara, Ātman is the spirit of the Self, and is the spirit of the individual being. Ātman is
not the ego or the individual personality. The ego is a form of the individual soul, and the individual soul
(or jīva) is an appearance of Ātman. However, the appearance of Ātman should not to be confused with
the reality of Ātman. The reality of Ātman is that it is actually not different from Brahman.
Ātman is the Self of all individual beings. It is uncreated and eternal and may dwell within a body, but it
does not depend on the existence of a body. According to Śamkara, the embodiedness of the Self is an
illusion, and the embodied soul is an illusory appearance of the Self. The Self is not changed by any
physical transforma2ons which may affect the embodied soul, it con2nues to exist even a]er the body
ceases to exist and is not subject to samsāra (i.e. the endless cycle of birth, life, and death).
Śamkara holds that the mind or body is not the Self, and that the mind or body is only a changing
appearance of the Self. To believe that the mind or body is the Self is to try to superimpose the Non-Self
on the Self. This superimposi2on of the Non-Self (i.e. Anātman) on the Self (i.e. Ātman) is the source of
wrong knowledge or ignorance of Brahman, which is the necessary condi2on for māyā. Right knowledge
may be demonstrated by an ability to dis2nguish between the Non-Self and the Self, and by an ability to
avoid superimposing the Non-Self on the Self or the Self on the Non-Self.
Śamkara emphasizes that avidya is not only ignorance, or lack of knowledge, but is also wrong or illusory
knowledge. It leads to the tendency to superimpose plurality upon the unity of Atman and Brahman.
Right knowledge (vidya) leads to a true understanding of the absolute unity of Ātman and Brahman.
Further, the existence of the individual self (or jīva) is only apparent, and that it is a product of ignorance.
The appearance of the soul is the effect of lack of knowledge however, the soul is nothing but Brahman.
The Self is known, then Brahman is known. In Brahman there is no duality between the knower and the
known, there is no duality between subject and object. The duality between subject and object in the
empirical world is the effect of not having knowledge of the absolute unity of Brahman.
Accordingly, Brahman cannot become an object of sensory percep2on. However, anything that is
perceived by the senses is dependent on Brahman. Although Brahman itself is not an empirical object,
all empirical phenomena depend on it for their reality. Thus, whatever reality belongs to empirical
phenomena depends on the degree to which they manifest the absolute unity of Brahman. The
appearance of plurality in the empirical world is an effect of māyā and is illusory.
Further, the empirical world depends for its existence upon Brahman. Therefore, the empirical world
does not have an independent reality; and the plurality of appearances of the empirical world may be
mistaken for Brahman, just as a rope may be mistaken for a snake.
Śamkara explains that knowledge of the empirical world should not be mistaken for knowledge of
ul2mate reality. Ignorance (avidya) of Brahman may consist of not knowing the difference between the
empirical world and the world of ul2mate reality. According to Śamkara, māyā is the mistaken tendency
to regard appearance as reality; it is the unconscious tendency to perceive the world of appearances as
the world of ul2mate reality provides an illusory form of knowledge, and conceals Brahman along with
crea2ng the plurality of phenomena which characterize the empirical world. . This illusory or wrong
knowledge of the phenomenal world may be sublated or corrected by right knowledge of Brahman.
Thus, Śamkara argues that there are two types of knowledge: 1) lower knowledge, by which the
phenomenal world is apprehended, and 2) higher knowledge, by which Brahman is apprehended.
According to Śamkara, 2me, space, and causality belong to the empirical world, but do not belong to
Brahman. Brahman transcends 2me, space, and causality. It is not caused by anything, and the concept
of Brahman as a cause of the plurality of its own appearances may be the result of ignorance.
Śamkara also believes that while Brahman itself is without cause or effect, personal God or God (īśvara)
is the material cause, as well as the opera2ve cause, of the world of existence. For Śamkara, God is
thought to be the creator of the world and is the ruler of the universe. However, he asserts that God
(Saguna-Brahman) has abributes, while Brahman (Nirguna- Brahman) is without abributes.
Spiritual release (moksa) is abained by means of knowledge of the Nirguna- Brahman. The individual
soul is held in bondage to the body by ignorance. Śamkara also holds that moksa is not dependent on
ac2on, but that it depends on Self- knowledge. It is freedom from avidya (i.e. ignorance of the Self), it is
also release from bondage to māyā and is freedom from the tendency to superimpose the Non-Self on
the Self or the Self on the Non-Self.
For Śamkara, knowledge (jñāna) is more important than ac2on (karma) as a means of spiritual release or
salva2on. Love and devo2on, right conduct, and good ac2on are important as methods of prepara2on
for spiritual release, but the discipline of knowledge (jñāna-yoga) is the right way to gain an intui2ve
understanding of the absolute unity of Ātman and Brahman.