[Advaita-l] Shankara authenticates Shiva as the son of Brahma

[D Gayatri]

I am not sure we should brush aside everything that we find to be
inconvenient as arthavAda. For the mImAmsaka, the entire brahma jignAsa
portion is arthavAda!

I am not aware of Sri Shankara calling himself a sinner anywhere in his
bhAshyas. For the third point, please see my other response.

Regards
Gayatri

On Saturday, 13 August 2016, Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com> wrote:

> Firstly it is arthavAda, not to be taken literally.
>
> Secondly, you have several similar instances in slokas composed by
> mahAtmAs, some by Shankaracharya himself, where for the benefit of ajnani
> devotees, he says that I am a sinner, ajnAni, please help me Lord. It
> doesn't mean Shankaracharya is an ajnAni or a sinner, it is said on behalf
> of such devotees.
>
> Thirdly, as I have said Rudra is an amshA. When Sri Rama was lamenting
> over the loss of Sita one cannot say that the sarvajna Narayana is
> lamenting, and for that lament to be cited as a reason to deny Narayana's
> Ishvaratvam.
>
> Regards,
> Venkatraghavan
>
> On 13 Aug 2016 1:02 p.m., "D Gayatri" <dgayatrinov10 at gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','dgayatrinov10 at gmail.com');>> wrote:
>
>> Alright, you have a point. So I will explain why you can't compare birth
>> of Rudra from Prajapati to that of Ishwara taking an incarnation. This is
>> because, the baby Rudra, in the satapatha brahmana episode, cries that he
>> is not free from sins. Certainly, this is not the mark of Ishwara, since
>> Ishwara is always free from sins.
>>
>> Regards
>> Gayatri
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>