[Advaita-l] Re: itihAsa purANa in the bR^ihadAraNyaka

[Annapureddy Siddhartha Reddy]

namastE Ramaji,
         Please refer to this old post by Vidyasankarji on the
occurrence of "itihAsa purANah" in the ChAMDOgya upaniShat.h:
http://www.hindunet.org/alt_hindu/1995_Jan/msg00017.html

Here shaN^kara takes it to mean mahAbhArata and some other purANa. Is
there any reason why shaN^kara doesn't identify the reference in the
bR^ihadAraNyaka similarly? Thanks.

A.Siddhartha.

It seemed to me that

> Sri Shankara strictly adheres to mImA.nsA rules when it does not
> contradict advaita. So he interprets itihaasas and puraaNas in the
> same upanishad to mean the *un-historical* inclidents related in the
> vedas itself and not as the usual puraaNas or itihaasas. Of course
> Sureshvara thinks this is durukta and states so in the vaartika. He
> interprtes the passage to mean the usual puraaNas and itihaasas. But
> it seems most advaitins follow Shankaras opinion on this matter.
>
> Rama