Sage Sankara also said the study of the Upanishad was neither indispensable nor a necessary prerequisite for attaining the human goal, the moksha.+

The history of Advaita is replete with the interpretation and reinterpretation of Sage Sankara’s philosophical work. The generation of Advaita followers that succeeded Sage Sankara wrote many commentaries on Sage Sankara’s work. Each commentator claimed that he grasped the essence and true intent of Sage Sankara and went on to write according to his own understanding. In that process, he wove into the commentaries his personal views and attributed them to Sage Sankara.

This kind of adulation gave rise to several versions of Advaita. The numerous glosses written by his followers tried to blend a ritualistic attitude with the monistic inclination of the Master. The result was the distortion of Sage Sankara’s position.

The purpose of the scriptures, Sage Sankara said, was to describe the reality as it is. Sage Sankara rejected the Mimamsa view and argued that scriptures were not mandatory in character, at least where it concerned the pursuit of wisdom.

Upanishads, he remarked, dealt with Brahman (God in truth) and that Brahman could not be a subject matter of injunctions and prohibitions.

Sage Sankara strongly advocated the study of Upanishads and, at the same time, cautioned that the study of Upanishads alone would not lead to liberation. In matters such as spiritual attainment, one’s own experience was the sole authority, and it cannot be disputed.

Sage Sankara also said the study of the Upanishad was neither indispensable nor a necessary prerequisite for attaining the human goal, the moksha. :~ Santthosh Kumaar