title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: On 12 June, López de Santa Anna dissolved Congress and announced his decision to adopt the plan. López de Santa Anna formed a new Catholic, centralist, conservative government. During this period, López de Santa Anna brokered an agreement with the Catholic Church, which had signed on to the plan. In exchange for preserving the Church's and the army's privileges, the Church promised a monthly donation to the government of 30,000–40,000 pesos. "The santanistas [supporters of López de Santa Anna] succeeded in achieving what the radicals had failed to do: forcing the Church to assist the republic's daily fiscal needs with its funds and properties." On 4 January 1835, López de Santa Anna returned to his hacienda, placing Miguel Barragán as acting president. In 1835, López de Santa Anna replaced the 1824 constitution with the new constitutional document known as the "Siete Leyes" ("The Seven Laws"). López de Santa Anna did not involve himself with the conservative centralists as they moved to replace the federal constitution that dispersed power to the states with a unitary power in the hands of the central government, seemingly uneasy with their political path. "Although he has been blamed for the change to centralism, he was not actually present during any of the deliberations that led to the abolition of the federalist charter or the elaboration of the 1836 Constitution."


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: Several states openly rebelled against the changes including Alta California, Nuevo México, Tabasco, Sonora, Coahuila y Tejas, San Luis Potosí, Querétaro, Durango, Guanajuato, Michoacán, Yucatán, Jalisco, Nuevo León, Tamaulipas, and Zacatecas. Several of these states formed their own governments: the Republic of the Rio Grande, the Republic of Yucatán, and the Republic of Texas. Their fierce resistance was possibly fueled by reprisals López de Santa Anna committed against his defeated enemies. The "New York Post" editorialized that "had [López de Santa Anna] treated the vanquished with moderation and generosity, it would have been difficult if not impossible to awaken that general sympathy for the people of Texas which now impels so many adventurous and ardent spirits to throng to the aid of their brethren."


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: The Zacatecas militia, the largest and best supplied of the Mexican states, led by Francisco García Salinas, was well armed with .753 caliber British 'Brown Bess' muskets and Baker .61 rifles. But, after two hours of combat on 12 May 1835, López de Santa Anna's "Army of Operations" defeated the Zacatecan militia and took almost 3,000 prisoners. He allowed his army to loot Zacatecas for forty-eight hours. After conquering Zacatecas, he planned to move on to Coahuila y Tejas to quell the rebellion there, which was being supported by settlers from the United States.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: In 1835, López de Santa Anna repealed the Mexican Constitution, which ultimately led to the beginning of the Texas Revolution. López de Santa Anna's reasoning for the repeal was that American settlers in Texas were not paying taxes or tariffs, claiming they were not recipients of any services provided by the Mexican Government. As a result, new settlers were not allowed there. The new policy was a response to the U.S. attempts to purchase Texas from Mexico. Like other states discontented with the central Mexican government, the Texas Department of the Mexican state of Coahuila y Tejas rebelled in late 1835 and declared itself independent on 2 March 1836. The northeastern part of the state had been settled by numerous Anglo-American immigrants. The father of Stephen F. Austin, Moses Austin, had his party accepted by Spanish authorities in exchange for defense against foreign threats. However, Mexico had declared independence from Spain before Moses Austin died.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: López de Santa Anna marched north to bring Texas back under Mexican control by a show of brute merciless force. His expedition posed challenges of manpower, logistics, supply, and strategy far beyond what he was prepared for, and it ended in disaster. To fund, organize, and equip his army, he relied, as he often did, on forcing wealthy men to provide loans. He recruited hastily, sweeping up many derelicts and ex-convicts, as well as Indians who could not understand Spanish commands.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: His army expected tropical weather and suffered from the cold as well as shortages of traditional foods. Stretching a supply line far longer than ever before, he lacked horses, mules, cattle, and wagons, and thus had too little food and feed. The medical facilities were minimal. Morale sank as soldiers realized there were not enough chaplains to properly bury their bodies. Regional Indians attacked military stragglers; water sources were polluted, and many men were sick. Because of his weak staff system, López de Santa Anna was oblivious to the challenges and was totally confident that a show of force and a few massacres would have the rebels begging for mercy.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: At the Battle of the Alamo, López de Santa Anna's forces killed 189 Texan insurgents on 6 March 1836 and executed more than 342 Texan prisoners at the Goliad Massacre on 27 March 1836. These executions were conducted in a manner similar to the executions he witnessed of Mexican rebels in the 1810s as a young soldier.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: However, López de Santa Anna's forces suffered unexpectedly heavy casualties in the battle. In 1874, he asserted in a letter that killing the Alamo insurgents was his only option. The letter stressed that Alamo garrison commander William B. Travis was to blame for the degree of violence at the Alamo. López de Santa Anna believed that Travis was rude and disrespectful towards him, and had that not happened, he would have allowed Sam Houston to establish a dominant presence there. In his letter, he stated that the disrespect of Travis led to the demise of all of his followers, which he claimed took only a couple of hours.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: The Mexican army victory at the Alamo bought time for General Houston and his Texas forces. During the siege of the Alamo, the Texas Navy had more time to plunder ports along the Gulf of Mexico, and the Texian Army gained more weapons and ammunition. Despite Houston's lack of ability to maintain strict control of the Texian Army, they completely routed López de Santa Anna's much larger army at the Battle of San Jacinto on 21 April 1836. The Texans shouted, "Remember Goliad, Remember the Alamo!" The day after the battle, a small Texan force led by James Austin Sylvester captured López de Santa Anna. They found the general dressed in a dragoon private's uniform and hiding in a marsh.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: Texas President David G. Burnet and López de Santa Anna signed the Treaties of Velasco, the latter under duress, stating that "in his official character as chief of the Mexican nation, he acknowledged the full, entire, and perfect Independence of the Republic of Texas." In exchange, Burnet and the Texas government guaranteed López de Santa Anna's safety and transport to Veracruz. Meanwhile, in Mexico City a new government declared that López de Santa Anna was no longer president and that the treaty he had made with Texas was null and void. The Mexican Congress also rejected the treaty. While López de Santa Anna was captive in Texas, Joel Roberts Poinsett,  U.S. minister to Mexico in 1824, offered a harsh assessment of General López de Santa Anna's situation: "Say to General Santa Anna that when I remember how ardent an advocate he was of liberty ten years ago, I have no sympathy for him now, that he has gotten what he deserves." López de Santa Anna replied: "Say to Mr. Poinsett that it is very true that I threw up my cap for liberty with great ardor, and perfect sincerity, but very soon found the folly of it. A hundred years to come my people will not be fit for liberty. They do not know what it is, unenlightened as they are, and under the influence of Catholic clergy, a despotism is a proper government for them, but there is no reason why it should not be a wise and virtuous one."


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: After some time in exile in the U.S., and after meeting U.S. President Andrew Jackson in 1837, López de Santa Anna was allowed to return to Mexico. He was transported aboard the USS "Pioneer" to retire to his hacienda in Veracruz. While in Veracruz, López de Santa Anna wrote a manifesto in which he reflected on his Texas experiences as well as his surrender. His great impact on Mexico was that by age 35, he had built such a strong reputation as a military leader that he obtained high ranking. He acknowledged that by 1835, he considered Texas to be the biggest threat to Mexico, and he acted upon those threats.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: In 1838, López de Santa Anna had a chance for redemption from the loss of Texas. After Mexico rejected French demands for financial compensation for losses suffered by French citizens, France sent forces that landed in Veracruz in the Pastry War. The Mexican government gave López de Santa Anna control of the army and ordered him to defend the nation by any means necessary. He engaged the French at Veracruz. During the Mexican retreat after a failed assault, López de Santa Anna was hit in the left leg and hand by cannon fire. His shattered ankle required amputation of much of his leg, which he ordered buried with full military honors. Despite Mexico's final capitulation to French demands, López de Santa Anna used his war service and visible sacrifice to the nation to re-enter Mexican politics.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: Soon after, as Anastasio Bustamante's presidency turned chaotic, supporters asked López de Santa Anna to take control of the provisional government. López de Santa Anna was made president for the fifth time, taking over a nation with an empty treasury. The war with France had weakened Mexico, and the people were discontented. Also, a rebel army led by Generals José de Urrea and José Antonio Mexía, was marching towards the capital in opposition to López de Santa Anna. Commanding the army, López de Santa Anna crushed the rebellion in Puebla.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: López de Santa Anna ruled in a more dictatorial way than during his first administration. His government banned anti-Santanista newspapers and jailed dissidents to suppress opposition. In 1842, he directed a military expedition into Texas. It inflicted numerous casualties with no political gain, but Texans began to be persuaded of the potential benefits of annexation by the more powerful United States.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: López de Santa Anna was unable to control the Mexican congressional elections of 1842. The new Congress was composed of men of principles who vigorously opposed the autocratic leader.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: Trying to restore the treasury, López de Santa Anna raised taxes, but this aroused resistance. Several Mexican states stopped dealing with the central government, and Yucatán and Laredo declared themselves independent republics. With resentment growing, López de Santa Anna stepped down from power and fled in December 1844. The buried leg he left behind in the capital was dug up by a mob and dragged through the streets until nothing was left of it. Fearing for his life, he tried to elude capture, but in January 1845 he was apprehended by a group of Native Americans near Xico, Veracruz. They turned him over to authorities, and López de Santa Anna was imprisoned. His life was spared, but he was exiled to Cuba.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: In 1846, when Mexican and American troops moved towards the Rio Grande into the disputed Nueces Strip, López de Santa Anna was in exile in Cuba. The Mexican army rapidly lost two major battles at Palo Alto and Resaca de la Palma.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: At that point the return of López de Santa Anna became more palatable. A coalition including Juan Alvarez forced out President Mariano Paredes and sought a return to a federal republic under the Constitution of 1824 with López de Santa Anna as president. Paredes was overthrown on 4 August 1846, and López de Santa Anna returned to Mexico from exile two days later. López de Santa Anna wrote to the government in Mexico City saying he had no aspirations to the presidency but would eagerly use his military experience in the new conflict.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: U.S. President James K. Polk had hoped to acquire territory in the north by purchase or force, but the Mexican government was not willing to yield. In a gambit to change the dynamic, Polk sent agents to secretly meet with the exiled López de Santa Anna. They thought they had extracted a promise from him that they would lift the blockade of the Mexican coast to allow him to return and that he would broker a deal. Once back in Mexico at the head of an army, López de Santa Anna reneged on the deal, which had been a ruse to return to Mexico and lead the fight against the U.S. invasion.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: It had only been a year since he was forced out of the republic, and López de Santa Anna was still popular among the Mexican people. Although he had a history of double-dealing and corruption, many Mexicans acknowledged that López de Santa Anna was the most reliable person to help Mexico get through the many obstacles and threats that the country would often face. López de Santa Anna had no intention of getting involved in politics again, intending to focus solely on aiding the military in its war against the United States.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: With no path now for a quick resolution to the conflict in the north, Polk authorized an invasion of central Mexico to take the capital and force Mexico to the negotiating table, redirecting the bulk of General Zachary Taylor's troops to General Winfield Scott's army. López de Santa Anna mobilized troops and artillery and rapidly marched north. López de Santa Anna's forces outnumbered Taylor's, but his troops were exhausted, ill-clothed, hungry, and equipped with inferior weapons when the two armies met at La Angostura in the Battle of Buena Vista on 22–23 February 1847. Hard fighting over two days brought an inconclusive result, with López de Santa Anna withdrawing from the field of battle overnight just as complete victory was at hand, taking war trophies such as cannons and battle flags as evidence of his victory. With Scott's army landing at Veracruz, López de Santa Anna's home ground, he rapidly moved southward to engage with the invaders and protect the capital. For the Mexicans it would have been better if Scott could have been prevented from leaving the Gulf Coast, but they could not prevent Scott's march on Xalapa. López de Santa Anna set defenses at Cerro Gordo. U.S. forces outflanked him and against strong odds defeated López de Santa Anna's army.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: With that battle, the way was clear for Scott's forces to advance further onto the capital. López de Santa Anna's aim was to protect it at all costs and waged defensive warfare, placing strong defenses on the most direct road to the capital at El Peñon, which Scott then avoided. Battles at Contreras, Churubusco, and Molino del Rey were lost. At Contreras, Mexican General Gabriel Valencia, an old political and military rival of López de Santa Anna's, did not recognize López de Santa Anna's authority as supreme commander and disobeyed his orders as to where his troops should be placed. Valencia's Army of the North was routed.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: The Battle for Mexico City and the Battle of Chapultepec, like the others, were hard fought losses, and the U.S. forces took the capital. "Despite his many faults as a tactician and his overbearing political ambition, López de Santa Anna was committed to fighting to the bitter end. His actions would prolong the war for at least a year, and more than any other single person it was López de Santa Anna who denied Polk's dream of a short war."


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: Perhaps López de Santa Anna's most personal and ignominious incident in the war was the capture during the Battle of Cerro Gordo of his prosthetic cork leg, which remains as a war trophy in the U.S. held by the Illinois State Military Museum but no longer on display. Images of it remain accessible on the web. A second leg, a peg, was also captured by the 4th Illinois and was reportedly used by the soldiers as a baseball bat; it is displayed at the home of Illinois Governor Richard J. Oglesby (who served in the regiment) in Decatur. López de Santa Anna had a replacement leg made which is displayed at the Museo Nacional de Historia in Mexico City.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: The prosthetic played a role in international politics. As relations between the U.S. and Mexico warmed during the run-up to World War II, Illinois was rumored to be ready to return it to Mexico and, in 1942, a bill was introduced in the state legislature. The Association of Limb Manufacturers wanted to be part of the repatriation ceremonies. The state passed a non-binding resolution to return it, but the National Guard denied the transfer. As of 2016 the leg still resided in the Illinois State Military Museum in Springfield.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: Following defeat in the Mexican–American War in 1848, López de Santa Anna went into exile in Kingston, Jamaica. Two years later, he moved to Turbaco, Colombia. In April 1853, he was invited back by conservatives who had overthrown a weak liberal government, initiated under the Plan de Hospicio in 1852, drawn up by the clerics in the cathedral chapter of Guadalajara. Usually, revolts were fomented by military officers; this one was created by churchmen. López de Santa Anna was elected president on 17 March 1853. López de Santa Anna honored his promises to the Church, revoking a decree denying protection for the fulfillment of monastic vows, a reform promulgated twenty years earlier during the era of Valentín Gómez Farías. The Jesuits, who had been expelled from Spanish realms by the crown in 1767, were allowed to return to Mexico ostensibly to educate poorer classes, and much of their property, which the crown had confiscated and sold, was restored to them.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: Although he gave himself exalted titles, López de Santa Anna's situation was quite vulnerable. He declared himself dictator-for-life with the title "Most Serene Highness". His full title in this final period of power was "Hero ["benemérito"] of the nation, General of Division, Grand Master of the National and Distinguished Order of Guadalupe, Grand Cross of the Royal and Distinguished Spanish Order of Carlos III, and President of the Mexican Republic." The reality was that this administration was no more successful than his earlier ones, dependent on loans from moneylenders and support from conservative elites, the church, and the army.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: A major miscalculation was his sale of territory to the U.S. in what became known as the Gadsden Purchase. La Mesilla, the land in northwest Mexico that the U.S. wanted, was much easier terrain for the building of a transcontinental railway line in the U.S. The purchase money for the land was supposedly to go to Mexico's empty treasury. López de Santa Anna was unwilling to wait until the final transaction went through and the boundary line established, wanting access to the $3M immediately. He bargained with American bankers to get immediate cash, while they gained the right to the revenue when the sale closed. His short-sighted deal netted the Mexican government only $250,000 against credit of $650,000 going to the bankers. James Gadsden thought the amount was likely much higher.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: A group of Liberals including Juan Alvarez, Benito Juárez, and Ignacio Comonfort overthrew López de Santa Anna under the Plan of Ayutla, which called for his removal from office. He went into exile yet again in 1855.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: López de Santa Anna married twice, both times to wealthy young women. At neither wedding ceremony did he appear, legally empowering his future father-in-law to serve as a proxy at his first wedding and a friend at his second. One assessment of the two marriages is that they were arranged marriages of convenience, bringing considerable wealth to López de Santa Anna and that his lack of attendance at the wedding ceremonies "appears to confirm that he was purely interested in the financial aspect on the alliance."


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: In 1825, he married Inés García, the daughter of wealthy Spanish parents in Veracruz, and the couple had four children: María de Guadalupe, María del Carmen, Manuel, and Antonio López de Santa Anna y García. By 1825, López de Santa Anna had distinguished himself as a military man, joining the movement for independence when other criollos were also seeing Mexican autonomy as the way forward under royalist turned insurgent Agustín de Iturbide and the Army of Three Guarantees. When Iturbide as Mexican emperor lost support, López de Santa Anna had been in the forefront of leaders seeking to oust him. Although López de Santa Anna's family was of modest means, he was of good criollo lineage; the García family may well have seen a match between their young daughter and the up-and-coming López de Santa Anna as advantageous. María Inés's dowry allowed López de Santa Anna to purchase the first of his haciendas, Manga de Clavo, in Veracruz state.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: The wife of the first Spanish ambassador to Mexico, Fanny Calderón de la Barca and her husband visited with López de Santa Anna's first wife Inés at Manga de Clavo, where they were well-received with a breakfast banquet. Calderón de la Barca observed that "After breakfast, the Señora having dispatched an officer for her cigar-case, which was gold with a diamond latch, offered me a cigar, which I having declined, she lighted her own, a little paper 'cigarette', and the gentlemen followed her good example."


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: Two months after the death of his wife Inés García in 1844, the 50-year-old López de Santa Anna married 16-year-old María de Los Dolores de Tosta. The couple rarely lived together; de Tosta resided primarily in Mexico City, and López de Santa Anna's political and military activities took him around the country. They had no children, leading biographer Will Fowler to speculate that either the marriage was primarily platonic or de Tosta was infertile.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: Several women claimed to have borne López de Santa Anna natural children. In his will, López de Santa Anna acknowledged and made provisions for four: Paula, María de la Merced, Petra, and José López de Santa Anna. Biographers have identified three more: Pedro López de Santa Anna, and Ángel and Augustina Rosa López de Santa Anna.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: From 1855 to 1874, López de Santa Anna lived in exile in Cuba, the United States, Colombia, and Saint Thomas. He had left Mexico because of his unpopularity with the Mexican people after his defeat in 1848 and traveled to and from Cuba, the United States, and Europe. He participated in gambling and businesses with the hopes that he would become rich. During his many years in exile, López de Santa Anna was a passionate fan of the sport of cockfighting. He had many roosters that he entered into competitions and would have his roosters compete with cocks from all over the world.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: In the 1850s, he traveled to New York with a shipment of chicle, which he intended to sell for use in buggy tires. He attempted but was unsuccessful in convincing U.S. wheel manufacturers that this substance could be more useful in tires than the materials they were originally using. Although he introduced chewing gum to the United States, he did not make any money from the product. Thomas Adams, the American assigned to aid López de Santa Anna while he was in the U.S., experimented with chicle in an attempt to use it as a substitute for rubber. He bought one ton of the substance from López de Santa Anna, but his experiments proved unsuccessful. Instead, Adams helped to found the chewing gum industry with a product that he called "chiclets."


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: In 1865, he attempted to return to Mexico and offer his services during the French invasion, seeking once again to play the role as the country's defender and savior, only to be refused by Juárez. Later that year a schooner owned by Gilbert Thompson, son-in-law of Daniel Tompkins, brought López de Santa Anna to his home in Staten Island, New York, where he tried to raise money for an army to return and take over Mexico City.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: In 1874, he took advantage of a general amnesty issued by President Sebastián Lerdo de Tejada and returned to Mexico, by then crippled and almost blind from cataracts. López de Santa Anna died at his home in Mexico City on 21 June 1876 at age 82. He was buried with full military honors in a glass coffin in Panteón del Tepeyac Cemetery.


title: Antonio López de Santa Anna

text: He was highly controversial at the time and ever since. In the 2007 biography by Will Fowler, Santa Ana was depicted as, “a liberal a Republican, and army man, a hero, a revolutionary, a regional strongman, but never a politician. He presented himself as a mediator who was both anti-party and anti-politics in the decades when the new country of Mexico was wracked by factional infighting. He was always more willing to lead an army than to lead his country”.


title: 17 Again (film)

text: 17 Again is a 2009 American teen fantasy comedy film directed by Burr Steers. The film follows a 37-year-old man named Mike (Matthew Perry) who becomes his 17-year-old self (Zac Efron) after a chance accident. The film also stars Leslie Mann, Thomas Lennon, Michelle Trachtenberg, Melora Hardin and Sterling Knight in supporting roles. The film was released in the United States on April 17, 2009. It received mixed reviews from critics and grossed $139 million.


title: 17 Again (film)

text: In 1989, 17-year-old star athlete Mike O'Donnell's girlfriend Scarlet Porter tells him that she is pregnant, just moments before his likely scholarship-clinching high-school championship basketball game. Mike plays the first few seconds of the game, then walks off the court and goes after Scarlet, abandoning his hopes of going to college and achieving a career that could support their future. Twenty years later, 37-year-old Mike finds his life stagnant and boring, abandoning any project he starts. Scarlet, now his wife and mother of their two children, has filed for divorce, forcing him to move in with his geeky, yet extremely wealthy, best friend, Ned Gold. He has quit his job after he is passed over for a promotion he believed he deserves, and his high-school-age kids, 18-year-old Maggie and 16-year-old Alex, want nothing to do with him. Later, while driving, an encounter on a bridge with a janitor transforms Mike back into his 17-year-old self.


title: 17 Again (film)

text: After convincing Ned of his identity, Ned believes that Mike's transformation was caused by a mystical spirit guide who is trying to steer him on a better path. Mike enrolls in high school posing as Mark Gold, Ned's son, and plans to go to college on a basketball scholarship. As he befriends his bullied son and discovers that his daughter has a boyfriend, Stan, who does not respect her and frequently torments Alex, Mike comes to believe that his mission is to help them.


title: 17 Again (film)

text: Through their kids, Mike spends time with Scarlet, who notes his remarkable resemblance to her husband, but rationalizes it as an odd coincidence. Deciding to also try and fix his relationship with Scarlet, Mike begins to finish (under the pretense of getting "volunteer credit") all of the garden projects he abandoned as an adult. He does his best to separate Stan and Maggie while also encouraging Alex to be more confident so he can make the basketball team and go out with a girl he has a crush on named Nicole. Mike has difficulty resisting his desire for Scarlet despite the relationship's clear inappropriateness. Ned, meanwhile, begins to pursue the school's principal Jane Masterson through increasingly extravagant stunts in order to win her affections, which she adamantly rebukes, though she agrees to a date after he offers to buy laptops for the school.


title: 17 Again (film)

text: On their date, Jane is completely unimpressed with Ned until he drops the "sophisticated rich-guy" persona and admits he is actually a geek. Jane then reveals her own enthusiasm for geek culture by speaking to him in Elvish, and the two hit it off. Mike throws a party to celebrate a basketball game win at Ned's house while Ned is out with Jane, where he confronts Stan, who had recently dumped Maggie for not sleeping with him. Mike gets knocked out and wakes up to Maggie trying to seduce him. Mike tells his daughter that he is in love with someone else and Maggie leaves, much to Mike's relief. Scarlet arrives at the party worried about her kids attending, but Mike shows her that Alex has finally managed to get together with his crush. The two have an intimate conversation where Mike, caught up in the moment, tries to kiss her. Disgusted, she storms off as Mike tries unsuccessfully to explain his true identity.


title: 17 Again (film)

text: On the day of the court hearing to finalize Scarlet and Mike's divorce, Mike makes one last attempt to win her back (as Mark) by reading a supposed letter from Mike. He states that although he couldn't set things right in the beginning of his life, it doesn't change the fact that he still loves her. After he exits, Scarlet notices that the "letter" is actually the directions to the courtroom and she begins to grow curious. As a result, she postpones the divorce by a month. Frustrated that he could not salvage his marriage, Mike decides to once again pursue a scholarship and move on with a new life. During a high school basketball game, Mike reveals himself to Scarlet. As Scarlet runs away, Mike decides to chase her down, just like he did in 1989, but not before handing the ball off to his son. Mike is then transformed back into his 37-year-old self, and happily reunites with Scarlet, saying that she was the best decision he ever made.


title: 17 Again (film)

text: As Mike prepares for his first day as the new basketball coach at his kids' school, Ned, who has successfully started a relationship with Jane, gifts him a whistle, both happy with their new starts in life.


title: 17 Again (film)

text: On Rotten Tomatoes the film has an approval rating of 56% based on 149 reviews, with an average rating of 5.40/10. The site's critics consensus reads, "Though it uses a well-worn formula, "17 Again" has just enough Zac Efron charm to result in a harmless, pleasurable teen comedy." On Metacritic, the film has a weighted average score of 48 out of 100, based on reviews from 27 critics, indicating "mixed or average reviews". Audiences polled by CinemaScore gave the film an average grade of "A−" on an A+ to F scale.


title: 17 Again (film)

text: Roger Ebert gave the film 3 stars out of 4, writing: ""17 Again" is pleasant, harmless PG-13 entertainment, with a plot a little more surprising and acting a little better than I expected."


title: 17 Again (film)

text: Justin Chang of Variety wrote: "Zac Efron's squeaky-clean tweener-bait profile is unlikely to be threatened by "17 Again", an energetic but earthbound comic fantasy that borrows a few moves, if little inspiration, from "Big" and "It's a Wonderful Life"."


title: 17 Again (film)

text: The film was projected to take in around $20 million in its opening weekend. Opening in 3,255 theaters in the United States and Canada, the film grossed $23.7 million ranking #1 at the box office, with 70% of the audience consisting of young females. By the end of its run, "17 Again" grossed $64.2 million in North America and $72.1 million internationally, totaling $136.3 million worldwide.


title: 17 Again (film)

text: The orchestral score was written by Rolfe Kent and orchestrated by Tony Blondal. It was recorded at Skywalker Sound.


title: 17 Again (film)

text: A South Korean television series titled "18 Again" based on the film aired on JTBC from September 21 to November 10, 2020.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Advaita Vedanta (; , ) is a Hindu sādhanā, a path of spiritual discipline and experience, and the oldest extant tradition of the orthodox Hindu school Vedānta. The term "Advaita" (literally "non-secondness", but usually rendered as "nondualism", and often equated with monism) refers to the idea that "Brahman" alone is ultimately real, while the transient phenomenal world is an illusory appearance ("maya") of Brahman. In this view, ("jiv)Ātman", the experiencing self, and "Ātman-Brahman", the highest Self and Absolute Reality, is non-different. The "jivatman" or individual self is a mere reflection or limitation of singular "Ātman" in a multitude of apparent individual bodies.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: In the Advaita tradition, "moksha" (liberation from suffering and rebirth) is attained through recognizing this illusoriness of the phenomenal world and disidentification from the body-mind complex and the notion of 'doership', and acquiring "vidyā" (knowledge) of one's true identity as "Atman"-"Brahman", self-luminous ("svayam prakāśa") awareness or Witness-consciousness. Upanishadic statements such as "tat tvam asi", "that you are," destroy the ignorance ("avidyā") regarding one's true identity by revealing that "(jiv)Ātman" is non-different from immortal "Brahman". While the prominent 8th century Vedic scholar and teacher ("acharya") Adi Shankara emphasized that, since Brahman is ever-present, Brahman-knowledge is immediate and requires no 'action', that is, striving and effort, the Advaita tradition also prescribes elaborate preparatory practice, including contemplation of the mahavakyas and accepting yogic samadhi as a means to knowledge, posing a paradox which is also recognized in other spiritual disciplines and traditions.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Advaita Vedānta adapted philosophical concepts from Buddhism, giving them a Vedantic basis and interpretation, and was influenced by, and influenced, various traditions and texts of Indian philosophy, While Adi Shankara is generally regarded as the most prominent exponent of the Advaita Vedānta tradition, his early influence has been questioned, as his prominence started to take shape only centuries later in the 14th century, with the ascent of Sringeri matha and its "jagadguru" Vidyaranya (Madhava, 14th cent.) in the Vijayanagara Empire. While Shankara did not embrace "Yoga", the Advaita Vedānta tradition in medieval times explicitly incorporated elements from the yogic tradition and texts like the "Yoga Vasistha" and the "Bhagavata Purana", culminating in Swami Vivekananda's full embrace and propagation of Yogic samadhi as an Advaita means of knowledge and liberation. In the 19th century, due to the influence of Vidyaranya's "Sarvadarśanasaṅgraha", the importance of Advaita Vedānta was overemphasized by Western scholarship, and Advaita Vedānta came to be regarded as the paradigmatic example of Hindu spirituality, despite the numerical dominance of theistic Bhakti-oriented religiosity. In modern times, Advaita views appear in various Neo-Vedānta movements.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: "Advaita" is often translated as "non-duality," but a more apt translation is "non-secondness." "Advaita" has several meanings:


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The word "Vedānta" is a composition of two Sanskrit words: The word Veda refers to the whole corpus of vedic texts, and the word "anta" means 'end'. The meaning of "Vedānta" can be summed up as "the end of the vedas" or "the ultimate knowledge of the vedas". Vedānta is one of six orthodox schools of Hindu philosophy.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: While "a preferred terminology" for Upanisadic philosophy "in the early periods, before the time of Shankara" was "Puruṣavāda", the Advaita Vedānta school has historically been referred to by various names, such as "Advaita-vada" (speaker of Advaita), "Abheda-darshana" (view of non-difference), "Dvaita-vada-pratisedha" (denial of dual distinctions), and "Kevala-dvaita" (non-dualism of the isolated). 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,


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: 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. In contrast, according to Frits Staal, a professor of philosophy specializing in Sanskrit and Vedic studies, the word "Advaita" is from the Vedic era, and the Vedic sage Yajnavalkya (8th or 7th-century BCE) is credited to be the one who coined it. 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."


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: While the term "Advaita Vedanta" in a strict sense may refer to the scholastic tradition of textual exegesis established by Shankara, "advaita" in a broader sense may refer to a broad current of advaitic thought, which incorporates advaitic elements with yogic thought and practice and other strands of Indian religiosity, such as Kashmir Shaivism and the Nath tradition. The first connotation has also been called "Classical Advaita" and "doctrinal Advaita," and its presentation as such is due to medieaval doxographies, the influence of Orientalist Indologists like Paul Deussen, and the Indian response to colonial influences, dubbed neo-Vedanta by Paul Hacker, who regarded it as a deviation from "traditional" Advaita Vedanta. Yet, post-Shankara Advaita Vedanta incorporated yogic elements, such as the Yoga Vasistha, and influenced other Indian traditions, and neo-Vedanta is based on this broader strand of Indian thought. This broader current of thought and practice has also been called "greater Advaita Vedanta," "vernacular advaita," and "experiential Advaita." It is this broader advaitic tradition which is commonly presented as "Advaita Vedanta," though the term "advaitic" may be more apt.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The nondualism of Advaita Vedānta is often regarded as an idealist monism. According to King, Advaita Vedānta developed "to its ultimate extreme" the monistic ideas already present in the Upanishads. In contrast, states Milne, it is misleading to call Advaita Vedānta "monistic," since this confuses the "negation of difference" with "conflation into one." "Advaita" is a negative term (a-dvaita), states Milne, which denotes the "negation of a difference," between subject and object, or between perceiver and perceived.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: According to Deutsch, Advaita Vedānta teaches monistic oneness, however without the multiplicity premise of alternate monism theories. According to Jacqueline Suthren Hirst, Adi Shankara positively emphasizes "oneness" premise in his Brahma-sutra Bhasya 2.1.20, attributing it to all the Upanishads.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Nicholson states Advaita Vedānta contains realistic strands of thought, both in its oldest origins and in Shankara's writings.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Advaita is a subschool of Vedānta, the latter being one of the six classical Hindu "darśanas", an integrated body of textual interpretations and religious practices which aim at the attainment of "moksha", release or liberation from transmigratory existence. Traditional Advaita Vedānta centers on the study and what it believes to be correct understanding of the "sruti", revealed texts, especially the Principal Upanishads, along with the Brahma Sutras and the Bhagavad Gitā, which are collectively called as "Prasthantrayi".


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: A main question in all schools of Vedanta is the relation between the individual self (jiva) and "Atman"/"Brahman". Shankara and his followers regard Atman/Brahman to be the ultimate Real, and "jivanatman" "ultimately [to be] of the nature of Atman/Brahman." This truth is established from a literal reading of selected parts of the oldest Principal Upanishads and Brahma Sutras, and is also found in parts of the Bhagavad Gitā and numerous other Hindu texts, and is regarded to be self-evident, though great effort is made to show the correctness of this reading, and its compatibility with reason and experience, by criticizing other systems of thought. "Vidya", correct knowledge or understanding of the identity of jivan-ātman and Brahman, destroys or makes null "avidya" ('false knowledge'), and results in liberation.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: According to the contemporary Advaita tradition, this knowledge can be obtained by "svādhyāya", study of the self and of the Vedic texts, which consists of four stages of "samanyasa": "virāga" ('renounciation'), "sravana" ('listening to the teachings of the sages'), "mawnana" ('reflection on the teachings') and "nididhyāsana", introspection and profound and repeated meditation on the mahavakyas, selected Upanishadic statements such as "tat tvam asi" ('that art thou' or 'you are That') which are taken literal, and form the "srutic" evidence for the identity of "jivanatman" and Atman-Brahman. This meditation negates the misconceptions, false knowledge, and false ego-identity, rooted in "maya", which obfuscate the ultimate truth of the oneness of Brahman, and one's true identity as "Atman-Brahman." This culminates in what Adi Shankara refers to as "anubhava", immediate intuition, a direct awareness which is construction-free, and not construction-filled. It is not an awareness "of" Brahman, but instead an awareness that "is" Brahman. Although the threefold practice is broadly accepted in the Advaita tradition, and affirmed by Mandana Misra, it is at odds with Shankara, who took a subitist position, arguing that "moksha" is attained at once when the "mahavakyas", articulating the identity of "Atman" and "Brahman", are understood.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: While closely related to Samkhya, the Advaita Vedānta tradition rejects the dualism of Samkhya "purusha" (primal consciousness) and "prakriti" (nature), instead stating that Brahman is the sole Reality, "that from which the origination, subsistence, and dissolution of this universe proceed." Samkhya argues that Purusha is the efficient cause of all existence while Prakriti is its material cause. Advaita, like all Vedanta schools, states that Brahman is both the efficient and the material cause. What created all existence is also present in and reflected in all beings and inert matter, the creative principle was and is everywhere, always. By accepting this postulation, various theoretical difficulties arise which Advaita and other Vedānta traditions offer different answers for. First, how did Brahman, which is "sat" ('existence'), without any distinction, become manifold universe? Second, how did Brahman, which is "cit" ('consciousness'), create the material world? Third, if Brahman is "ananda" ('bliss'), why did the empirical world of sufferings arise? The Brahma Sutras do not answer these philosophical queries, and later Vedantins including Shankara had to resolve them. To solve these questions, Shankara introduces the concept of "Unevolved Name-and-Form," or primal matter corresponding to "Prakriti", from which the world evolves, coming close to Samkhya dualism. Shankara's notion of "Unevolved Name-and-Form" was not adopted by the later Advaita tradition; instead, the later tradition turned "avidya" into a metaphysical principle, namely "mulavidya" or "root ignorance," a metaphysical substance which is the "primal material cause of the universe ("upadana")." Prakasatmans (13th c.) defense of "vivarta" to explain the origin of the world, which declared phenomenal reality to be an illusion, became the dominant explanation, with which the primacy of Atman/Brahman can be maintained.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Classical Advaita Vedānta states that all reality and everything in the experienced world has its root in Brahman, which is unchanging Consciousness. To Advaitins, there is no duality between a Creator and the created universe. All objects, all experiences, all matter, all consciousness, all awareness are somehow also this one fundamental reality Brahman. Yet, the knowing self has various experiences of reality during the waking, dream and dreamless states, and Advaita Vedānta acknowledges and admits that from the empirical perspective there are numerous distinctions. Advaita explains this by postulating different levels of reality, and by its theory of errors ("anirvacaniya khyati").


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Absolute and relative reality are valid and true in their respective contexts, but only from their respective particular perspectives. John Grimes explains this Advaita doctrine of absolute and relative truth with the example of light and darkness. From the sun's perspective, it neither rises nor sets, there is no darkness, and "all is light". From the perspective of a person on earth, sun does rise and set, there is both light and darkness, not "all is light", there are relative shades of light and darkness. Both are valid realities and truths, given their perspectives. Yet, they are contradictory. What is true from one point of view, states Grimes, is not from another. To Advaita Vedānta, this does not mean there are two truths and two realities, but it only means that the same one Reality and one Truth is explained or experienced from two different perspectives.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: As they developed these theories, Advaita Vedānta scholars were influenced by some ideas from the Nyaya, Samkhya and Yoga schools of Hindu philosophy. These theories have not enjoyed universal consensus among Advaitins, and various competing ontological interpretations have flowered within the Advaita tradition.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Ātman (IAST: ātman, Sanskrit: आत्मन्) is the "real self" or "essence" of the individual. It is "caitanya", Pure Consciousness, a consciousness, states Sthaneshwar Timalsina, that is "self-revealed, self-evident and self-aware ("svaprakashata")," and, states Payne, "in some way permanent, eternal, absolute or unchanging." It is self-existent awareness, limitless and non-dual. It is "a stable subjectivity, or a unity of consciousness through all the specific states of individuated phenomenality." Ātman, states Eliot Deutsch, is the "pure, undifferentiated, supreme power of awareness", it is more than thought, it is a state of being, that which is conscious and transcends subject-object divisions and momentariness. According to Ram-Prasad, "it" is not an object, but "the irreducible essence of being [as] subjectivity, rather than an objective self with the quality of consciousness."


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: According to Shankara, it is self-evident and "a matter not requiring any proof" that Atman, the 'I', is 'as different as light is from darkness' from non-Atman, the 'you' or 'that', the material world whose characteristics are mistakingly superimposed on Atman, resulting in notions as "I am this" and "This is mine." One's real self is not the constantly changing body, not the desires, not the emotions, not the ego, nor the dualistic mind, but the introspective, inwardly self-conscious "on-looker" ("saksi"), which is in reality completely disconnected from the non-Atman.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The "jivanatman" or individual self is a mere reflection of singular Atman in a multitude of apparent individual bodies. It is "not an individual subject of consciousness," but the same in each person and identical to the universal eternal Brahman, a term used interchangeable with Atman.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: "Atman" is often translated as soul, though the two concepts differ significantly, since "soul" includes mental activities, whereas "Atman" solely refers to detached witness-consciousness.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Advaita posits three states of consciousness, namely waking (jagrat), dreaming (svapna), deep sleep (suṣupti), which are empirically experienced by human beings, and correspond to the Three Bodies Doctrine:


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Advaita also posits the fourth state of Turiya, which some describe as pure consciousness, the background that underlies and transcends these three common states of consciousness. Turiya is the state of liberation, where states Advaita school, one experiences the infinite ("ananta") and non-different ("advaita/abheda"), that is free from the dualistic experience, the state in which ajativada, non-origination, is apprehended. 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, real, immanent in all things and transcendent. Those who have experienced the Turiya stage of self-consciousness have reached the pure awareness of their own non-dual Self as one with everyone and everything, for them the knowledge, the knower, the known becomes one, they are the "Jivanmukta".


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Advaita traces the foundation of this ontological theory in more ancient Sanskrit texts. For example, chapters 8.7 through 8.12 of Chandogya Upanishad discuss the "four states of consciousness" as awake, dream-filled sleep, deep sleep, and beyond deep sleep. One of the earliest mentions of "Turiya", in the Hindu scriptures, occurs in verse 5.14.3 of the "Brihadaranyaka Upanishad". The idea is also discussed in other early Upanishads.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: For the Advaita tradition, consciousness is svayam prakāśa, "self-luminous," which means that "self is pure awareness by nature." According to Dasgupta, it is "the most fundamental concept of the Vedanta." According to Jonardon Ganeri, the concept was introduced by the Buddhist philosopher Dignāga (c.480–c.540 CE), and accepted by the Vedanta tradition; according to Zhihua Yao, the concept has older roots in the Mahasanghika school. According to T. R. V. Murti,


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: According to Advaita Vedānta, Brahman is the true Self, consciousness, awareness, and the only Reality ("Sat"). Brahman is "Paramarthika Satyam", "Absolute Truth" or absolute Reality. It is That which is unborn and unchanging, and immortal. Other than "Brahman", everything else, including the universe, material objects and individuals, are ever-changing and therefore maya. Brahman is "not sublatable", which means it cannot be superseded by a still higher reality:


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: In Advaita, Brahman is the substrate and cause of all changes. Brahman is considered to be the material cause and the efficient cause of all that exists. The Brahma Sutras I.1.2 state that Brahman is:


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Advaita's Upanishadic roots state Brahman's qualities to be "Sat-cit-ānanda", "true being-consciousness-bliss," or "Eternal Bliss Consciousness". A distinction is made between "nirguna Brahman", formless Brahman, and "saguna Brahman", Brahman with form, that is, "Ishvara", God. "Nirguna Brahman" is undescrible, and the Upanishadic "neti neti" ('not this, not that' or 'neither this, nor that') negates all conceptualizations of Brahman.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: "Avidyā" is a central tenet of Shankara's Advaita, and became the main target of Ramanuja's criticism of Shankara. In Shankara's view, avidyā is "adhyasa", "the superimposition of the qualities of one thing upon another." As Shankara explains in the "Adhyasa-bhasya", the introduction to the "Brahmasutrabhasya":


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Due to "avidya", we're steeped in "loka drsti", the empirical view. From the beginning we only perceive the empirical world of multiplicity, taking it to be the only and true reality. Due to avidyā there is ignorance, or nescience, of the real Self, "Atman-Brahman", mistakingly identifying the Self with the body-mind complex. With "parmartha drsti" ignorance is removed and "vidya" is acquired, and the Real, distinctionless Brahman is perceived as the True reality.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The notion of avidyā and its relationship to Brahman creates a crucial philosophical issue within Advaita Vedānta thought: how can avidyā appear in Brahman, since Brahman is pure consciousness? For Shankara, "avidya" is a perceptual or psychological error. According to Satchidanandendra Saraswati, for Shankara ""avidya" is only a technical name to denote the natural tendency of the human mind that is engaged in the act of superimposition." The later tradition diverged from Shankara by turning "avidya" into a metaphysical principle, namely "mulavidya" or "root ignorance," a metaphysical substance which is the "primal material cause of the universe ("upadana")," thereby setting aside Shankara's 'Unevolved Name-and-Form' as the explanation for the existence of materiality. According to Mayeda, "[i]n order to save monism, they characterized "avidya" as indefinable as real or unreal ("sadasadbhyam anirvacanya"), belonging neither to the category of being nor to that of non-being." 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.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Shankara did not give a 'location' of "avidya", giving precedence to the removal of ignorance. Sengaku Mayeda writes, in his commentary and translation of Adi Shankara's Upadesasahasri:


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The later Advaita-tradition diverged from Shankara, trying to determinate a locus of "avidya", with the Bhamati-school locating "avidya" in the "jiva" c.q. "prakriti", while the Vivarana-school locates it in Brahman.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: In Advaita Vedanta, the perceived empirical world, "including people and other existence," is Māyā, "appearance." Jiva, conditioned by the human mind, is subjected to experiences of a subjective nature, and misunderstands and interprets the physical, changing world as the sole and final reality. Due to "avidya", we take the phenomenal world to be the final reality, while in Reality only "Sat" ( True Reality, Brahman) is Real and unchanging.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: 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. According to Hacker, maya is not a prominent theme for Shankara, in contrast to the later Advaita tradition, and "the word "maya" has for [Shankara] hardly any terminological weight."


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Due to avidya, atman is covered by "koshas" (sheaths or bodies), which hide man's true nature. According to the Taittiriya Upanishad, the Atman is covered by five koshas, usually rendered "sheath". They are often visualized like the layers of an onion. From gross to fine the five sheaths are:


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Cause and effect are an important topic in all schools of Vedanta. Two sorts of causes are recognised, namely , the efficient cause, that which causes the existence of the universe, and , the material cause, that from which the matery of this universe comes. All schools of Vedānta agree that Brahman is both the material and the efficient cause, and all subscribe to the theory of "Satkāryavāda", which means that the effect is pre-existent in the cause.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: There are different views on the origination of the empirical world from Brahman. All commentators "agree that Brahman is the cause of the world," but disagree on how exactly Brahman is the cause of the world. According to Nicholson, "Medieaval Vedantins distinguisghed two basic positions." "Parinamavada" is the idea that the world is a real transformation ("parinama") of Brahman. "Vivartavada" is the idea that


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The "Brahma Sutras", the ancient Vedantins, most sub-schools of Vedānta, as well as Samkhya argue for "parinamavada". The "most visible advocates of Vivartavada," states Nicholson, are the Advaitins, the followers of Shankara. "Although the world can be described as conventionally real", adds Nicholson, "the Advaitins claim that all of Brahman's effects must ultimately be acknowledged as unreal before the individual self can be liberated".


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Yet, Adi Shankara himself most likely explained causality through "parinamavada". In Shankara's works ""Brahman" constitutes the basic essence ("svabhava") of the universe (BS Bh 3.2.21) and as such the universe cannot be thought of as distinct from it (BS Bh 2.1.14)." In Shankara's view, then, "The world is real, but only in so far as its existence is seen as totally dependent upon "Brahman"."


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Shankara introduced the concept of "Unevolved Name-and-Form," or primal matter corresponding to "Prakriti", from which the world evolves, but this concept was not adopted by the later Advaita tradition. Vivartavada became the dominant explanation, with which the primacy of Atman/Brahman can be maintained. Scholars such as Hajime Nakamura and Paul Hacker already noted that Adi Shankara did not advocate "Vivartavada", and his explanations are "remote from any connotation of illusion".


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: It was the 13th century scholar Prakasatman, who founded the influential Vivarana school, who gave a definition to "vivarta", introducing the notion that the world is illusory. It is Prakasatman's theory that is sometimes misunderstood as Adi Shankara's position. Andrew Nicholson concurs with Hacker and other scholars, adding that the "vivarta-vada" isn't Shankara's theory, that Shankara's ideas appear closer to "parinama-vada", and the "vivarta" explanation likely emerged gradually in Advaita subschool later.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The soteriological goal, in Advaita, is to gain self-knowledge as being in essence (Atman), awareness or witness-consciousness, and complete understanding of the identity of "jivan-ātman" and Brahman. Correct knowledge of Atman and Brahman is the attainment of "Brahman", immortality, and leads to "moksha" (liberation) from suffering and "samsara", the cycle of rebirth This is stated by Shankara as follows:


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: According to Advaita Vedānta, liberation can be achieved while living, and is called "Jivanmukti". in contrast to "Videhamukti" (moksha from samsara after death) in theistic sub-schools of Vedānta. The Atman-knowledge, that is the knowledge of true Self and its relationship to Brahman is central to this liberation in Advaita thought. Atman-knowledge, to Advaitins, is that state of full awareness, liberation and freedom which overcomes dualities at all levels, realizing the divine within oneself, the divine in others and all beings, the non-dual Oneness, that Brahman is in everything, and everything is Brahman.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: According to Anantanand Rambachan, in Advaita, this state of liberating self-knowledge includes and leads to the understanding that "the self is the self of all, the knower of self sees the self in all beings and all beings in the self."


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Advaita Vedānta regards the liberated state of being "Atman-Brahman" as one's true identity and inherent to being human. According to Shankara and the Vivarana-school, no human action can 'produce' this liberated state, as it is what one already is. As Swami Vivekananda stated:


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Yet, the Advaita-tradition also emphasizes human effort, the path of Jnana Yoga, a progression of study and training to realize one's true identity as "Atman-Brahman" and attain moksha. According to critics of neo-Advaita, which also emphasizes direct insight, traditional Advaita Vedanta entails more than self-inquiry or bare insight into one's real nature, but also includes self-restraint, textual studies and ethical perfection. It is described in classical Advaita books like Shankara's Upadesasahasri and the Vivekachudamani, which is also attributed to Shankara.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: "Sruti" (scriptures), proper reasoning and meditation are the main sources of knowledge ("vidya") for the Advaita Vedānta tradition. It teaches that correct knowledge of Atman and Brahman is achievable by "svādhyāya", study of the self and of the Vedic texts, and three stages of practice: "sravana" (perception, hearing), "manana" (thinking) and "nididhyasana" (meditation), a three-step methodology that is rooted in the teachings of chapter 4 of the "Brihadaranyaka Upanishad".


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The Advaita student has to develop the fourfold qualities, or behavioral qualifications ("Samanyasa", "Sampattis", "sādhana-catustaya"): A student is Advaita Vedānta tradition is required to develop these four qualities -


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The Advaita tradition teaches that correct knowledge, which destroys "avidya", psychological and perceptual errors related to Atman and Brahman, is obtained in "jnanayoga" through three stages of practice, "sravana" (hearing), "manana" (thinking) and "nididhyasana" (meditation). This three-step methodology is rooted in the teachings of chapter 4 of the "Brihadaranyaka Upanishad":


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Although the threefold practice is broadly accepted in the Advaita tradition, Shankara's works show an ambivalence toward it: while accepting its authenticity and merits, as it is based in the scriptures, he also takes a subitist position, arguing that "moksha" is attained at once when the "mahavakyas", articulating the identity of "Atman" and "Brahman", are understood. According to Rambachan, "it is not possible to reconcile Sankara's views with this seemingly well-ordered system."


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Mandana Misra, on the other hand, explicitly affirms the threefold practice as the means to acquire knowledge of Brahman, referring to meditation as "dhyana". He states that these practices, though conceptual, 'can eliminate both ignorance and coneptuality at the same time, leaving only the "pure, transparent nature" of self-awareness'.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Bilimoria states that these three stages of Advaita practice can be viewed as "sadhana" practice that unifies "Yoga" and "Karma" ("action," referring here to ritual) ideas, and was most likely derived from these older traditions.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Advaita Vedānta school has traditionally had a high reverence for Guru (teacher), and recommends that a competent Guru be sought in one's pursuit of spirituality, though this is not mandatory. Reading of Vedic literature and reflection is the most essential practice. Adi Shankara, states Comans, regularly employed compound words "such as "Sastracaryopadesa" (instruction by way of the scriptures and the teacher) and "Vedāntacaryopadesa" (instruction by way of the Upanishads and the teacher) to emphasize the importance of Guru". According to Comans, this reflects the Advaita tradition which holds a competent teacher as important and essential to gaining correct knowledge, freeing oneself from false knowledge, and to self-realization. Nevertheless, in the Bhamati-school the guru has a less essential role, as he can explain the teachings, but the student has to venture its further study.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: A guru is someone more than a teacher, traditionally a reverential figure to the student, with the "guru" serving as a "counselor, who helps mold values, shares experiential knowledge as much as literal knowledge, an exemplar in life, an inspirational source and who helps in the spiritual evolution of a student. The guru, states Joel Mlecko, is more than someone who teaches specific type of knowledge, and includes in its scope someone who is also a "counselor, a sort of parent of mind and soul, who helps mold values and experiential knowledge as much as specific knowledge, an exemplar in life, an inspirational source and who reveals the meaning of life."


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: In classical Indian thought, "pramana" (means of knowledge) concerns questions like how correct knowledge can be acquired; how one knows, how one doesn't; and to what extent knowledge pertinent about someone or something can be acquired. In contrast to other schools of Indian philosophy, early Vedanta paid little attention to "pramana". The "Brahmasutras" are not concerned with "pramana", and "pratyaksa" (sense-perception) and "anumana" (inference) refer there to "sruti" and "smriti" respectively. Shankara recognized the means of knowledge, but his thematic focus was upon metaphysics and soteriology, and he took for granted the "pramanas". For Shankara, "sabda" is the only means of knowledge for attaining "Brahman-jnana". According to Sengaku Mayeda, "in no place in his works [...] does he give any systematic account of them," 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."


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Nevertheless, the Advaita tradition accepts altogether six kinds of . While Adi Shankara emphasized "Śabda" (शब्द), relying on word, testimony of past or present reliable experts with regard to religious insights, and also accepted "pratyakṣa" (प्रत्यक्षाय), perception; and "anumāṇa" (अनुमान), inference — Classical Advaita Vedānta, just like the Bhatta Purvamimamsaka school, also accepts "upamāṇa" (उपमान), comparison, analogy; "arthāpatti" (अर्थापत्ति), postulation, derivation from circumstances; and "anupalabdi" (अनुपलब्धि), non-perception, negative/cognitive proof.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The Advaita tradition emphasizes that, since Brahman is ever-present, Brahman-knowledge is immediate and requires no 'action', that is, striving and effort, as articulated by Shankara; yet, it also prescribes elaborate preparatory practice, including yogic samadhi, posing a paradox which is also recognized in other spiritual disciplines and traditions.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Shankara regarded the "srutis" as the means of knowledge of Brahman, and he was ambivalent about yogic practices and meditation, which at best may prepare one for "Brahma-jnana". 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. The Bhamati school and the Vivarana school differed on the role of contemplation, but they both "deny the possibility of perceiving supersensuous knowledge through popular yoga techniques." Later Advaita texts like the "Dṛg-Dṛśya-Viveka" (14th century) and "Vedāntasara (of Sadananda)" (15th century) added samādhi as a means to liberation, a theme that was also emphasized by Swami Vivekananda. The Vivekachudamani, traditionally attributed to Shankara but post-dating him, "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." Koller states that yogic concentration is an aid to gaining knowledge in Advaita.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The role of "anubhava", "anubhuti" ("experience," "intuition") as "experience" in gaining "Brahman-jnana" is contested. While neo-Vedanta claims a central position for "anubhava" as "experience," Shankara himself regarded reliance on textual authority as sufficient for gaining "Brahman-jnana", "the intuition of Brahman," and used "anubhava" interchangeably with "pratipatta", "understanding". Arvind Sharma argues that Shankara's own "direct experience of the ultimate truth" guided him in selecting "those passages of the scriptures that resonate with this experience and will select them as the key with which to open previously closed, even forbidden, doors."


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The "Vivekachudamani" "explicit[ly] declar[es] that experience ("anubhuti") is a "pramana", or means of knowing (VCM 59)," and neo-Vedanta also accepts "anubhava" ("personal experience") as a means of knowledge. Dalal and others state that "anubhava" does not center around some sort of "mystical experience," but around the correct knowledge of Brahman. Nikhalananda conquers, stating that (knowledge of) "Atman" and "Brahman" can only be reached by "buddhi", "reason," stating that mysticism is a kind of intuitive knowledge, while "buddhi" is the highest means of attaining knowledge.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Since Gaudapada, who adopted the Buddhist four-cornered negation which negates any positive predicates of 'the Absolute', a central method in Advaita Vedanta to express the inexpressable is the method called "Adhyaropa Apavada". In this method, which was highly estimated by Satchidanandendra Saraswati, a property is imposed ("adhyaropa") on Atman to convince one of its existence, whereafter the imposition is removed ("apavada") to reveal the true nature of Atman as nondual and undefinable. In this method, "That which cannot be expressed is expressed through false attribution and subsequent denial." As Shankara writes, "First let me bring them on the right path, and then I will gradually be able to bring them round to the final truth afterwards." For example, Atman, the real "I," is described as witness, giving "it" an attribute to separate it from non-self. Since this implies a duality between observer and observed, next the notion of "witness" is dropped, by showing that the Self cannot be seen and is beyond qualifications, and only that what is remains, without using any words:


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: "Moksha", liberation from suffering and rebirth and attaining immortality, is attained by disidentification from the body-mind complex and gaining self-knowledge as being in essence "Atman", and attaining knowledge of the identity of "Atman" and Brahman. According to Shankara, the individual Ātman and Brahman seem different at the empirical level of reality, but this difference is only an illusion, and at the highest level of reality they are really identical. The real self is "Sat", "the Existent," that is, "Atman-Brahman". Whereas the difference between Atman and non-Atman is deemed self-evident, knowledge of the identity of Atman and Brahman is revealed by the "shruti", especially the Upanishadic statement "tat tvam asi".


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: According to Shankara, a large number of Upanishadic statements reveal the identity of "Atman" and "Brahman". In the Advaita Vedanta tradition, four of those statements, the "Mahavakyas", which are taken literal, in contrast to other statements, have a special importance in revealing this identity. They are:


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The longest chapter of Shankara's "Upadesasahasri", chapter 18, "That Art Thou," is devoted to considerations on the insight "I am ever-free, the existent" ("sat"), and the identity expressed in Chandogya Upanishad 6.8.7 in the "mahavakya" (great sentence) ""tat tvam asi"", "that thou art." In this statement, according to Shankara, "tat" refers to "'Sat", "the Existent" Existence, Being, or Brahman, the Real, the "Root of the world," the true essence or root or origin of everything that exists. "Tvam" refers to one's real I, "pratyagatman" or inner Self, the "direct Witness within everything," "free from caste, family, and purifying ceremonies," the essence, "Atman", which the individual at the core is. As Shankara states in the "Upadesasahasri":


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The statement "tat tvam asi" sheds the false notion that "Atman" is different from "Brahman". According toNakamura, the non-duality of "atman" and "Brahman" "is a famous characteristic of Sankara's thought, but it was already taught by Sundarapandya" (c.600 CE or earlier). Shankara cites Sundarapandya in his comments to "Brahma Sutra" verse I.1.4:


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: From this, and a large number of other accordances, Nakamura concludes that Shankar was not an original thinker, but "a synthesizer of existing Advaita and the rejuvenator, as well as a defender, of ancient learning."


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: In the "Upadesasahasri Shankara", Shankara is ambivalent on the need for meditation on the Upanishadic "mahavakya". He states that "right knowledge arises at the moment of hearing," and rejects "prasamcaksa" or "prasamkhyana" meditation, that is, meditation on the meaning of the sentences, and in Up.II.3 recommends "parisamkhyana", separating "Atman" from everything that is not "Atman", that is, the sense-objects and sense-organs, and the pleasant and unpleasant things and merit and demerit connected with them. Yet, Shankara then concludes with declaring that only "Atman" exists, stating that "all the sentences of the "Upanishads" concerning non-duality of "Atman" should be fully contemplated, should be contemplated." As Mayeda states, "how they ["prasamcaksa" or "prasamkhyana" versus "parisamkhyana"] differ from each other in not known."


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: "Prasamkhyana" was advocated by Mandana Misra, the older contemporary of Shankara who was the most influential Advaitin until the 10th century. "According to Mandana, the "mahavakyas" are incapable, by themselves, of bringing about "brahmajnana". The "Vedanta-vakyas" convey an indirect knowledge which is made direct only by deep meditation ("prasamkhyana"). The latter is a continuous contemplation of the purport of the "mahavakyas". Vācaspati Miśra, a student of Mandana Misra, agreed with Mandana Misra, and their stance is defended by the Bhamati-school, founded by Vācaspati Miśra. In contrast, the Vivarana school founded by Prakasatman (c. 1200–1300) follows Shankara closely, arguing that the "mahavakyas" are the direct cause of gaining knowledge.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Shankara's insistence on direct knowledge as liberating also differs from the "asparsa yoga" described in Gaudapada's "Mandukyakarika" III.39-46. In this practice of 'non-contact' ("a-sparśa"), the mind is controlled and brought to rest, and does not create "things" (appearances) after which it grasps; it becomes non-dual, free from the subject-[grasping]-object dualism. Knowing that only "Atman-Brahman" is real, the creations of the mind are seen as false appearances (MK III.31-33). When the mind is brought to rest, it becomes or is "Brahman" (MK III.46).


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: In the "Upadesasahasri" Shankara discourages ritual worship such as oblations to "Deva" (God), because that assumes the Self within is different from Brahman. The "doctrine of difference" is wrong, asserts Shankara, because, "he who knows the Brahman is one and he is another, does not know Brahman". The false notion that "Atman" is different from "Brahman" is connected with the novice's conviction that ("Upadesasaharsi II.1.25")


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Recognizing oneself as "the Existent-"Brahman"," which is mediated by scriptural teachings, is contrasted with the notion of "I act," which is mediated by relying on sense-perception and the like. According to Shankara, the statement "Thou art That" "remove[s] the delusion of a hearer," "so through sentences as "Thou art That" one knows one's own "Atman", the witness of all internal organs," and not from any actions. With this realization, the performance of rituals is prohibited, "since [the use of] rituals and their requisites is contradictory to the realization of the identity [of "Atman"] with the highest "Atman"."


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Some claim, states Deutsch, "that Advaita turns its back on all theoretical and practical considerations of morality and, if not unethical, is at least 'a-ethical' in character". However, Deutsch adds, ethics "does" have a firm place in this philosophy. Its ideology is permeated with ethics and value questions enter into every metaphysical and epistemological analysis, and it considers "an independent, separate treatment of ethics are unnecessary". According to Advaita Vedānta, states Deutsch, there cannot be "any absolute moral laws, principles or duties", instead in its axiological view Atman is "beyond good and evil", and all values result from self-knowledge of the reality of "distinctionless Oneness" of one's real self, every other being and all manifestations of Brahman. Advaitin ethics includes lack of craving, lack of dual distinctions between one's own Self and another being's, good and just Karma.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The values and ethics in Advaita Vedānta emanate from what it views as inherent in the state of liberating self-knowledge. This state, according to Rambachan, includes and leads to the understanding that "the self is the self of all, the knower of self sees the self in all beings and all beings in the self." Such knowledge and understanding of the indivisibility of one's and other's Atman, Advaitins believe leads to "a deeper identity and affinity with all". It does not alienate or separate an Advaitin from his or her community, rather awakens "the truth of life's unity and interrelatedness". These ideas are exemplified in the Isha Upanishad – a "sruti" for Advaita, as follows:


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Adi Shankara, in verse 1.25 to 1.26 of his "Upadeśasāhasrī", asserts that the Self-knowledge is understood and realized when one's mind is purified by the observation of Yamas (ethical precepts) such as Ahimsa (non-violence, abstinence from injuring others in body, mind and thoughts), Satya (truth, abstinence from falsehood), Asteya (abstinence from theft), Aparigraha (abstinence from possessiveness and craving) and a simple life of meditation and reflection. Rituals and rites can help focus and prepare the mind for the journey to Self-knowledge, but can be abandoned when moving on to "hearing, reflection, and meditation on the Upanishads."


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Elsewhere, in verses 1.26–1.28, the Advaita text Upadesasahasri states the ethical premise of equality of all beings. Any "Bheda" (discrimination), states Shankara, based on class or caste or parentage is a mark of inner error and lack of liberating knowledge. This text states that the fully liberated person understands and practices the ethics of non-difference.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The Upanishads, the Bhagavad Gitā and Brahma Sutras are the central texts of the Advaita Vedānta tradition, providing doctrines about the identity of "Atman" and "Brahman" and their changeless nature.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Adi Shankara gave a nondualist interpretation of these texts in his commentaries. Adi Shankara's "Bhashya" (commentaries) have become central texts in the Advaita Vedānta philosophy, but are one among many ancient and medieval manuscripts available or accepted in this tradition. The subsequent Advaita tradition has further elaborated on these sruti and commentaries. Adi Shankara is also credited for the famous text Nirvana Shatakam.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The "Vedānta" tradition provides exegeses of the "Upanishads", the "Brahma Sutras", and the "Bhagavadgita", collectively called the "Prasthanatrayi", literally, "three sources".


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The Advaita Vedānta tradition considers the knowledge claims in the Vedas to be the crucial part of the Vedas, not its "karma-kanda" (ritual injunctions). The knowledge claims about self being identical to the nature of "Atman-Brahman" are found in the Upanishads, which Advaita Vedānta has regarded as "errorless revealed truth." 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.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Advaita Vedānta, like all orthodox schools of Hindu philosophy, accepts as an epistemic premise that Śruti (Vedic literature) is a reliable source of knowledge. The Śruti includes the four Vedas including its four layers of embedded texts – the Samhitas, the Brahmanas, the Aranyakas and the early Upanishads. Of these, the Upanishads are the most referred to texts in the Advaita school.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The possibility of different interpretations of the Vedic literature, states Arvind Sharma, was recognized by ancient Indian scholars. 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. This theme has been central to the Advaita school, making the Brahmasutra as a common reference and a consolidated textual authority for Advaita.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The Bhagavad Gitā, similarly in parts can be interpreted to be a monist Advaita text, and in other parts as theistic Dvaita text. It too has been widely studied by Advaita scholars, including a commentary by Adi Shankara.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: A large number of texts are attributed to Shankara; of these texts, the Brahma Sutra Bhasya (commentary on the Brahma Sutras), the commentaries on the principal Upanishads, and the Upadesasahasri are considered genuine and stand out. Other notable texts attributed to Shankara are the Vivekachudamani, Atma bodha, and Aparokshanubhuti. Post-Shankara Advaita saw the composition of both scholarly commentaries and treatises, as well as popular works and compositions which incorporate Yoga ideas. These include Advaita Bodha Deepika and Dŗg-Dŗśya-Viveka. Texts which influenced the Advaita tradition include the Avadhuta Gita, the Yoga Vasistha, and the Yoga Yajnavalkya.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Advaita Vedānta is not just a philosophical system, but also a tradition of renunciation. Philosophy and renunciation are closely related:


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: According to tradition, around 740 AD Gaudapada founded Shri Gaudapadacharya Math, also known as . It is located in Kavale, Ponda, Goa, and is the oldest matha of the South Indian Saraswat Brahmins.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Shankara, himself considered to be an incarnation of Shiva, is credited with establishing the Dashanami Sampradaya, organizing a section of the Ekadandi monks under an umbrella grouping of ten names. Several Hindu monastic and Ekadandi traditions, however, remained outside the organisation of the Dasanāmis.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Sankara is said to have organised the Hindu monks of these ten sects or names under four (Sanskrit: ) (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. According to tradition, each math was first headed by one of his four main disciples, and the tradition continues since then. Yet, according to Paul Hacker, no mention of the "mathas" can be found before the 14th century CE. Until the 15th century, the timespan of the directors of Sringeri Math are unrealistically long, spanning 60+ and even 105 years. After 1386, the timespans become much shorter. According to Hacker, these mathas may have originated as late as the 14th century, to propagate Shankara's view of Advaita. According to another tradition in Kerala, after Sankara's samadhi at Vadakkunnathan Temple, his disciples founded four mathas in Thrissur, namely Naduvil Madhom, Thekke Madhom, Idayil Madhom and Vadakke Madhom.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Monks of these ten orders differ in part in their beliefs and practices, and a section of them is not considered to be restricted to specific changes attributed to Shankara. While the dasanāmis associated with the Sankara maths follow the procedures attributed to Adi Śankara, some of these orders remained partly or fully independent in their belief and practices; and outside the official control of the Sankara maths. The advaita sampradaya is not a Saiva sect, despite the historical links with Shaivism. Nevertheless, contemporary Sankaracaryas have more influence among Saiva communities than among Vaisnava communities.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The Smarta tradition of Hinduism is a synthesis of various strands of Indian religious thought and practice, which developed with the Hindu synthesis, dating back to the early first century CE. It is particularly found in south and west India, and revers all Hindu divinities as a step in their spiritual pursuit. Their worship practice is called "Panchayatana puja". The worship symbolically consists of five deities: Shiva, Vishnu, Devi or Durga, Surya and an Ishta Devata or any personal god of devotee's preference.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: In the Smarta tradition, Advaita Vedānta ideas combined with bhakti are its foundation. Adi Shankara is regarded as the greatest teacher and reformer of the Smarta. According to Alf Hiltebeitel, Shankara's Advaita Vedānta and practices became the doctrinal unifier of previously conflicting practices with the "smarta" tradition.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: 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 multiple icons are seen as multiple representations of the same idea, rather than as distinct beings. These serve as a step and means to realizing the abstract Ultimate Reality called nirguna 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".


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Advaita Vedānta and various other schools of Hindu philosophy share numerous terminology, doctrines and dialectical techniques with Buddhism. According to a 1918 paper by the Buddhism scholar O. Rozenberg, "a precise differentiation between Brahmanism and Buddhism is impossible to draw." Murti notices that "the ultimate goal" of Vedanta, Samkhya and Mahayana Buddhism is "remarkably similar"; while Advaita Vedanta postulates a "foundational self," "Mahayana Buddhism implicitly affirms the existence of a deep underlying reality behind all empirical manifestations in its conception of "sunyata" (the indeterminate, the void), or "vijnapti-matrata" (consciousness only), or "tathata" (thatness), or "dharmata" (noumenal reality)." According to Frank Whaling, the similarities between Advaita Vedānta and Buddhism are not limited to the terminology and some doctrines, but also includes practice. The monastic practices and monk tradition in Advaita are similar to those found in Buddhism.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The influence of Mahayana Buddhism on Advaita Vedānta has been significant. Sharma points out that the early commentators on the Brahma Sutras were all realists, or pantheist realists. He states that they were influenced by Buddhism, particularly during the 5th-6th centuries CE when Buddhist thought developing in the Yogacara school.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Von Glasenap states that there was a mutual influence between Vedanta and Buddhism. Dasgupta and Mohanta suggest that Buddhism and Shankara's Advaita Vedānta represent "different phases of development of the same non-dualistic metaphysics from the Upanishadic period to the time of Sankara."


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The influence of Buddhist doctrines on Gauḍapāda has been a vexed question. Modern scholarship generally accepts that Gauḍapāda was influenced by Buddhism, at least in terms of using Buddhist terminology to explain his ideas, but adds that Gauḍapāda was a Vedantin and not a Buddhist.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Adi Shankara, states Natalia Isaeva, incorporated "into his own system a Buddhist notion of "maya" which had not been minutely elaborated in the Upanishads". According to Mudgal, Shankara's Advaita and the Buddhist Madhyamaka view of ultimate reality are compatible because they are both transcendental, indescribable, non-dual and only arrived at through a "via negativa" (neti neti). Mudgal concludes therefore that "the difference between Sunyavada (Mahayana) philosophy of Buddhism and Advaita philosophy of Hinduism may be a matter of emphasis, not of kind. Similarly, there are many points of contact between Buddhism's Vijnanavada and Shankara's Advaita. According to S.N. Dasgupta,


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The Advaita Vedānta tradition has historically rejected accusations of crypto-Buddhism highlighting their respective views on "Atman", "Anatta" and "Brahman". Yet, some Buddhist texts chronologically placed in the 1st millennium of common era, such as the Mahayana tradition's "Tathāgatagarbha sūtras" suggest self-like concepts, variously called "Tathagatagarbha" or "Buddha nature". In modern era studies, scholars such as Wayman and Wayman state that these "self-like" concepts are neither self nor sentient being, nor soul, nor personality. Some scholars posit that the "Tathagatagarbha Sutras" were written to promote Buddhism to non-Buddhists.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The epistemological foundations of Buddhism and Advaita Vedānta are different. Buddhism accepts two valid means to reliable and correct knowledge – perception and inference, while Advaita Vedānta accepts six (described elsewhere in this article). However, some Buddhists in history, have argued that Buddhist scriptures are a reliable source of spiritual knowledge, corresponding to Advaita's "Śabda" pramana, however Buddhists have treated their scriptures as a form of inference method.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Advaita Vedānta posits a substance ontology, an ontology which holds that underlying the change and impermanence of empirical reality is an unchanging and permanent absolute reality, like an eternal substance it calls Atman-Brahman. In its substance ontology, as like other philosophies, there exist a universal, particulars and specific properties and it is the interaction of particulars that create events and processes. In contrast, Buddhism posits a process ontology, also called as "event ontology". According to the Buddhist thought, particularly after the rise of ancient Mahayana Buddhism scholarship, there is neither empirical nor absolute permanent reality and ontology can be explained as a process. There is a system of relations and interdependent phenomena ("pratitya samutpada") in Buddhist ontology, but no stable persistent identities, no eternal universals nor particulars. Thought and memories are mental constructions and fluid processes without a real observer, personal agency or cognizer in Buddhism. In contrast, in Advaita Vedānta, like other schools of Hinduism, the concept of self (atman) is the real on-looker, personal agent and cognizer.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Some Hindu scholars criticized Advaita for its "Maya" and non-theistic doctrinal similarities with Buddhism. sometimes referring to the Advaita-tradition as "Māyāvāda".


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Ramanuja, the founder of Vishishtadvaita Vedānta, accused Adi Shankara of being a "Prachanna Bauddha", that is, a "crypto-Buddhist", and someone who was undermining theistic Bhakti devotionalism. The non-Advaita scholar Bhaskara of the Bhedabheda Vedānta tradition, similarly around 800 CE, accused Shankara's Advaita as "this despicable broken down Mayavada that has been chanted by the Mahayana Buddhists", and a school that is undermining the ritual duties set in Vedic orthodoxy.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The Advaita Vedānta ideas, particularly of 8th century Adi Shankara, were challenged by theistic Vedānta philosophies that emerged centuries later, such as the 11th-century Vishishtadvaita (qualified nondualism) of Ramanuja, and the 14th-century Dvaita (theistic dualism) of Madhvacharya. Their application of Vedanta philosophy to ground their faith turned Vedanta into a major factor in India's religious landscape.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Ramanuja's Vishishtadvaita school and Shankara's Advaita school are both nondualism Vedānta schools, both are premised on the assumption that all Selfs can hope for and achieve the state of blissful liberation; in contrast, Madhvacharya and his Dvaita subschool of Vedānta believed that some Selfs are eternally doomed and damned. 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. Spiritual liberation to Shankara is the full comprehension and realization of oneness of one's unchanging Atman (Self) as the same as Atman in everyone else as well as being identical to the "nirguna" Brahman. In contrast, Ramanuja's theory posits both Brahman and the world of matter are two different absolutes, both metaphysically real, neither should be called false or illusive, and "saguna" Brahman with attributes is also real. God, like man, states Ramanuja, has both soul and body, and all of the world of matter is the glory of God's body. The path to Brahman (Vishnu), asserted Ramanuja, is devotion to godliness and constant remembrance of the beauty and love of personal god ("saguna" Brahman, Vishnu), one which ultimately leads one to the oneness with "nirguna" Brahman.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Vallabhacharya (1479–1531 CE), the proponent of the philosophy of Shuddhadvaita Brahmvad enunciates that Ishvara has created the world without connection with any external agency such as Maya (which itself is his power) and manifests Himself through the world. That is why shuddhadvaita is known as 'Unmodified transformation' or 'Avikṛta Pariṇāmavāda'. Brahman or Ishvara desired to become many, and he became the multitude of individual Selfs and the world. Vallabha recognises Brahman as the whole and the individual as a 'part' (but devoid of bliss).


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Madhvacharya was also a critic of Advaita Vedānta. Advaita's nondualism asserted that Atman (Self) and Brahman are identical, there is interconnected oneness of all Selfs and Brahman, and there are no pluralities. Madhva in contrast asserted that Atman (Self) and Brahman are different, only Vishnu is the Lord (Brahman), individual Selfs are also different and depend on Vishnu, and there are pluralities. Madhvacharya stated that both Advaita Vedānta and Mahayana Buddhism were a nihilistic school of thought. Madhvacharya wrote four major texts, including "Upadhikhandana" and "Tattvadyota", primarily dedicated to criticizing Advaita.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Followers of ISKCON are highly critical of Advaita Vedānta, regarding it as "māyāvāda", identical to Mahayana Buddhism.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Within the ancient and medieval texts of Hindu traditions, such as Vaishnavism, Shaivism and Shaktism, the ideas of Advaita Vedānta have had a major influence. Advaita Vedānta influenced Krishna Vaishnavism in the different parts of India. One of its most popular text, the "Bhagavata Purana", adopts and integrates in Advaita Vedānta philosophy. The "Bhagavata Purana" is generally accepted by scholars to have been composed in the second half of 1st millennium CE.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: In the ancient and medieval literature of Shaivism, called the "Āgamas", the influence of Advaita Vedānta is once again prominent. Of the 92 "Āgamas", ten are "Dvaita" texts, eighteen are "Bhedabheda", and sixty-four are "Advaita" texts. According to Natalia Isaeva, there is an evident and natural link between 6th-century Gaudapada's Advaita Vedānta ideas and Kashmir Shaivism.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Shaktism, the Hindu tradition where a goddess is considered identical to Brahman, has similarly flowered from a syncretism of the monist premises of Advaita Vedānta and dualism premises of Samkhya–Yoga school of Hindu philosophy, sometimes referred to as "Shaktadavaitavada" (literally, the path of nondualistic "Shakti").


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Other influential ancient and medieval classical texts of Hinduism such as the "Yoga Yajnavalkya", "Yoga Vashishta", "Avadhuta Gitā", "Markandeya Purana" and "Sannyasa Upanishads" predominantly incorporate premises and ideas of Advaita Vedānta.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The historiography of Advaita Vedanta is coloured by Orientalist notions, while modern formulations of Advaita Vedānta, which developed as a reaction to western Orientalism and Perennialism have "become a dominant force in Indian intellectual thought." According to Michael S. Allen and Anand Venkatkrishnan, "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."


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The Upanishads form the basic texts, of which Vedānta gives an interpretation. The Upanishads do not contain "a rigorous philosophical inquiry identifying the doctrines and formulating the supporting arguments". This philosophical inquiry was performed by the darsanas, the various philosophical schools.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: The Brahma Sutras of Bādarāyana, also called the "Vedānta Sutra", were compiled in its present form around 400–450 AD, but "the great part of the "Sutra" must have been in existence much earlier than that". Estimates of the date of Bādarāyana's lifetime differ between 200 BC and 200 AD. The Brahma Sutra is a critical study of the teachings of the Upanishads, possibly "written from a Bhedābheda Vedāntic viewpoint." Bādarāyana was not the first person to systematise the teachings of the Upanishads. He refers to seven Vedantic teachers before him.


title: Advaita Vedanta

text: Two Advaita writings predating Maṇḍana Miśra and Shankara were known to scholars such as Nakamura in the first half of 20th-century, namely the "Vākyapadīya", written by Bhartṛhari (second half 5th century), and the "Māndūkya-kārikā" written by Gauḍapāda (7th century). Later scholarship added the Sannyasa Upanishads (first centuries CE) to the earliest known corpus, some of which are of a sectarian nature, and have a strong Advaita Vedānta outlook.