Shankara, a profound philosopher in India, emerged during a period of political upheaval following

the decline of the Gupta dynasty and the waning influence of Buddhism and Jainism. Born around
700 CE, Shankara's intellectual prowess played a pivotal role in the revival of Hinduism amid these
transformative times. His focus on reforming the ancient Vedanta tradition, deeply rooted in the
Vedic quest for Brahman, showcased a commitment to revitalizing Hindu philosophy. Shankara's
Advaita Vedanta, a non-dualistic philosophy, served as a counterforce to the Buddhist influences that
had prevailed for the preceding seven centuries.

The Vedanta tradition, anchored by the Brahmasutra, gained prominence as it combated pluralistic
realism and dualism. Shankara's primary objective was to elucidate the concept of moksa, or final
release, by asserting the identity of Atman with Brahman. He argued that the perceived plurality in
the world was a consequence of ignorance, citing Upanishadic teachings to fortify his position. In
contrast to other Vedantic traditions, such as Ramanuja's qualified non-dualism and Madhva's
dualism, Shankara's Advaita Vedanta stood out for its emphasis on knowledge as the key to
liberation. This theme resonates strongly in his significant work, the Upadesasahasri.

In a historical context, Shankara engaged in a critical examination of four rival philosophical views.
First, he challenged the Mimamsa perspective, which positioned the self as an agent and actions as
the primary means of achieving the ultimate goal. Shankara refuted the notion of Atman as an agent,
asserting its changeless nature and attributing the appearance of agency to ignorance. To illustrate,
he employed the cause-and-effect framework, explaining how the mistaken attribution of agency to
Atman arises from misinterpreting modifications in ordinary consciousness.

Second, he scrutinized the pluralistic realism of the Nyaya-Vaisheshika tradition, questioning the
coherence of a world caused by the combination of unconscious atoms. Here, Shankara expanded on
the cause-and-effect theory, challenging the idea that unconscious atoms could genuinely produce
the ordered world and moral law.

Additionally, he dismissed the Buddhist teaching of no-self (anatmanvada) and discredited the
Sankhya dualism of spirit and matter. Shankara applied his cause-and-effect analysis to question how
an unconscious cause, as posited in Sankhya dualism, could lead to the harmonious system of the
world and its ultimate purpose.

Shankara's defense of non-dualism extended to a detailed critique of these rival philosophies. He

argued that changes in form are perceptible but do not signify a change in reality unless possessing
independent existence. Illustrating this with examples, Shankara emphasized the vital role of the
cause-and-effect relationship in determining the true nature of reality.

The distinction between the physical and subtle bodies, according to Shankara, is vital for
understanding the relationship between the unchanging Atman and the changing elements of
consciousness, mind, and senses. His exploration delved into the empirical self, elucidating how the
mind and senses contribute to the illusory identification with the body, stemming from ignorance.

Addressing the challenge of connecting the transcendent Atman with changing elements of ordinary
consciousness, Shankara introduced the concept of abhasa, or 'reflection.' This notion explained how
a false appearance leads individuals to mistake embodied consciousness for the pure consciousness
of Atman. Shankara's establishment of this link between Atman consciousness and ordinary
consciousness was crucial for the validity of the means of knowledge in ordinary consciousness.
In the pursuit of knowledge of Atman, Shankara acknowledged the role of faith and revelation,
particularly in Sruti (scripture). Despite considering the experiences of faith and knowledge as unreal
for the Atman, Shankara viewed faith as a provisional means for the embodied self until the
realization of Atman.

Shankara's conceptualization of an 'unmanifest name-and-form' as the source of consciousness and

the world aimed to explain the appearance of the body and the world. He likened this process to
foam arising from clear water, emphasizing the disparity in essence between Atman and name-and-
form. Critics questioned the efficacy of this analogy, arguing that it undermined the causal
relationship. However, Shankara's defenders maintained that conceptual distinctions and logical
analysis were insufficient to establish the reality of the ultimate Atman, relying instead on faith,
direct experience, and analogies.

In summary, Shankara's Advaita Philosophy emerged as a profound response to the challenges posed
by rival philosophical views, providing a robust framework for understanding the nature of reality,
knowledge, and liberation within the Vedanta tradition. His emphasis on non-dualism, knowledge as
the path to liberation, and critical engagement with competing philosophies solidified Shankara's
legacy as a key figure in the history of Indian philosophy.