The real purpose of the scriptures, Sage Sankara said, was to describe the reality as it is.+

The real purpose of the scriptures, Sage Sankara said, was to describe reality as it is. Sage Sankara rejected the Mimamsa view and argued that Scriptures are not mandatory in character, at least where it concerned the pursuit of wisdom. Upanishads, he remarked, dealt with Brahman and that Brahman could not be a subject matter of injunction 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 moksha. 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 Upanishad was neither indispensable nor a necessary prerequisite for attaining the human goal, the moksha.

Sage Sankara pointed out; that even those who were outside the Upanishad fold were as eligible for moksha as those within the fold were.

Sage Sankara declared that all beings are Brahman, and therefore, the question of discrimination did not arise. All that one was required to do was to get rid of Avidya (duality).

Sage Sankara pointed out that those rituals could in no way bring about wisdom, much less moksha.

Sage Sankara asserted, that while the rewards of the rituals are not a matter of direct realization, wisdom which is the fruit of Vedanta is based on immediate and personal realization; one need not have to wait for the reward nor one be in doubt whether the reward would or would not come.

This was in sharp contrast to the position taken by Mimamsakas who asserted that rituals alone would lead one to higher levels of attainment. Further, the deities would reward only those entitled to perform the rituals alone. The entitlement involved caste, creed, and other parameters.

Most of the ideas that Sage  Sankara rejected came back to the Advaita fold and the Mimamsa position with regard to the scriptural authority and value of rituals became a part of the Advaita posture.

The wisdom–oriented teachings of Sage Sankara became as much a face of Advaita as the rituals, worship, and other practices. There was, therefore, an obvious disparity between what Sage Sankara idealized and what his followers, even the elite, practiced.

Sage Sankara says:~ The scriptures dealing with rituals, and rewards are therefore addressed to an ignorant person. Thus, the rituals are meant for ignorant people.

Sage Sankara: ~ "Though I wear these robes of a Sanyasin, it is only for the sake of bread."

-  “This shows he was wearing a religious robe only for the sake of bread." Thus, it means those who are wearing a religious robe for the sake of bread.

All the rituals based on the false belief of Gods will not yield any fruits and they are meant for the ignorant populace who are unable to grasp the God beyond the form, time, and space.

One of Sage Sankara’s missions was to wean people away from a ritualistic approach advocated by Mimamsakas and to project wisdom (Gnana) as the means of liberation in the light of Upanishad teachings.

Sage Sankara criticized severely the ritualistic attitude and those who advocated such practices. However, the Orthodox texts that combined rituals with wisdom (jnana_karma_samucchaya) more in favor of the Mimamsaka position came into vogue, projecting Sage  Sankara as the rallying force of the doctrine.

Sage Sankara:~ (11) As regards the rituals, Sage Sankara says, that the person who performs rituals and aspires for rewards will view himself in terms of the caste into which he is born, his age, the stage of his life, his standing in society, etc. In addition, he is required to perform rituals all through his life. However, the 'Self' has none of those attributes or tags. Hence, the person who superimposes all those attributes on the changeless, eternal Self and identifies the Self with the body is a confusing one for the other; and is, therefore, an ignorant person. The scriptures dealing with rituals, rewards, etc. are therefore addressed to an ignorant person. -Adhyasa Bhashya 

Sage  Sankara:~ (11.1) This ignorance (mistaking the body for Self) brings in its wake a desire for the well-being of the body, aversion for its disease or discomfort, fear of its destruction, and thus a host of miseries(anartha). This anartha is caused by projecting karthvya(“doer” sense) and bhokthavya (object) on the Atman. Sankara calls this Adhyasa. The scriptures dealing with rituals, rewards, etc. are, therefore, he says, addressed to an ignorant person. -Adhyasa Bhashya 

Sage Sankara:~ (11.2) In short, a person who engages in rituals with the notion “I am an agent, doer, thinker”, according to Sage  Sankara, is ignorant, as his behavior implies a distinct, separate doer/agent/knower; and an object that is to be done/achieved/known. That duality is Avidya, an error that can be removed by Vidya. -Adhyasa Bhashya 

Sage Sankara: ~ (12) Sage Sankara affirming his belief in one eternal unchanging reality (Brahman) and the illusion of plurality, drives home the point that Upanishads deal not with rituals but with the knowledge of the Absolute (Brahma Vidya) and the Upanishads give us an insight into the essential nature of the Self which is identical with the Absolute, the Brahman.-Adhyasa Bhashya 

The rituals mentioned in the Karmakanda of the Vedas are sought to be negated in the jnanakanda which is also part of the same scripture. While the Karmakanda enjoins upon you the worship of various deities and lays down rules for the same, the jnanakanda constituted by the Upanishads ridicules the worshipper of deities as a dim-witted person no better than a beast.

This seems strange, the latter part of the Vedas contradicting the former part. The first part deals throughout with karma, while the second or concluding part is all about Gnana. Owing to this difference, people have gone so far as to divide the Scripture into two sections: the Vedas (that is the first part) to mean the Karmakanda and the Upanishads (Vedanta) to mean the Gnanakanda.

No conceptual God can exist, apart from consciousness.  People are not aware of the fact that there is no individual God can exist, apart from the Soul, which is in the form of consciousness. 

Thus the Soul or the consciousness is the  Self.   If there is no consciousness, then there is no physical body, no ego, no universe, no religion, and no conceptual God. : ~ Santthosh Kumaar