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

[D Gayatri]

>
> I meant when used as 'Ishvara uvācha'. This occurs in the MB. The instances
> in the BSB and BGB are not referring to Shiva. But the Kenopanishat bhashya
> is quite unique. The context too.

If the BGB and BSB Ishwara is not referring to Shiva, one fails to
understand why the sarvajna Ishwara, who is Brahman should suddenly
start referring to Shiva in the KU.

> With whom does Umā, the daughter of Himavān, reside eternally, according to
> you?  Only because Shankara is no vaishnavaite either that he does not bring
> in Vishnu in the Kena bhashya.

Shankara himself says in his Brihadaranyaka Bhashya that the Ishwara,
is called by the name Narayana. So there is no indication from
Shankara anywhere else that the Sarvajna Ishwara is someone else.
Swami Gambhirananda translates the word Ishwara as God and not as
Shiva.


> Yes, that is what even I am saying: It is one Brahman that takes the form of
> the trimurtis to perform those three key cosmic functions. Those names of
> the trimurtis is also very popular. Why should Shankara bring in the name
> Rudra there even though the mantra does not say so? He sees the word
> veeryena samharan there and associates Rudra with that function.
>
> इन्द्रस्त्वं प्राण तेजसा रुद्रोऽसि परिरक्षिता ।
> त्वमन्तरिक्षे चरसि सूर्यस्त्वं ज्योतिषां पतिः ॥ ९ ॥
> भाष्यम्
> किंच, इन्द्रः परमेश्वरः त्वं हे प्राण, तेजसा वीर्येण रुद्रोऽसि संहरन् जगत् ।
> स्थितौ च परि समन्तात् रक्षिता पालयिता ; परिरक्षिता त्वमेव जगतः सौम्येन रूपेण
> । त्वम् अन्तरिक्षे अजस्रं चरसि उदयास्तमयाभ्यां सूर्यः त्वमेव च सर्वेषां
> ज्योतिषां पतिः ॥
> And you alone protect, says Shankara, adding the word saumyena, from the
> word parirakshitā, which is also quite well known that it is Vishnu he has
> in mind.   The commentator adds: in the form of Vishnu, etc.
>
> Rudra is associated with destruction and in the BG 11 th ch. Krishna says: I
> am kāla, out to destroy the creation.  And I have shown that the same
> Krishna says in the MB that it is Rudra, known as Kāla, as distinct from
> himself, that slayed all those who lost their lives in the war. The prashna
> bhashya is quite plain, One entity taking various forms to perform the
> cosmic functions.


There is no indication in the BG, that the Vishwaroopa has anything to
do with Rudra. Yes, Rudra is sometimes treated as the deity of
destruction, there is no doubt about that. And Brahma is treated as
the deity of creation. There is no doubt about that too. But the
Mahabharata itself says that both these deities are nimitta mAtras at
the will of Aniruddha, who is Vishnu. And both are born from Narayana.
And Narayana is the one who is praised by all vedas. These are the
words of Krishna himself -

Mbh:12.328 -

श्रीभगवानुवाच||

ऋग्वेदे सयजुर्वेदे तथैवाथर्वसामसु | पुराणे सोपनिषदे तथैव ज्योतिषेऽर्जुन ||८||

 साङ्ख्ये च योगशास्त्रे च आयुर्वेदे तथैव च | बहूनि मम नामानि
कीर्तितानि महर्षिभिः ||९||

गौणानि तत्र नामानि कर्मजानि च कानिचित् | निरुक्तं कर्मजानां च शृणुष्व
प्रयतोऽनघ ||१०||

 कथ्यमानं मया तात त्वं हि मेऽर्धं स्मृतः पुरा ||१०||

नमोऽतियशसे तस्मै देहिनां परमात्मने | नारायणाय विश्वाय निर्गुणाय गुणात्मने ||११||

 यस्य प्रसादजो ब्रह्मा रुद्रश्च क्रोधसम्भवः | योऽसौ योनिर्हि सर्वस्य
स्थावरस्य चरस्य च ||१२||

अष्टादशगुणं यत्तत्सत्त्वं सत्त्ववतां वर | प्रकृतिः सा परा मह्यं रोदसी
योगधारिणी ||१३||

ऋता सत्यामराजय्या लोकानामात्मसञ्ज्ञिता ||१३||

तस्मात्सर्वाः प्रवर्तन्ते सर्गप्रलयविक्रियाः | ततो यज्ञश्च यष्टा च
पुराणः पुरुषो विराट् ||१४||

अनिरुद्ध इति प्रोक्तो लोकानां प्रभवाप्ययः ||१४||

ब्राह्मे रात्रिक्षये प्राप्ते तस्य ह्यमिततेजसः |
प्रसादात्प्रादुरभवत्पद्मं पद्मनिभेक्षण ||१५||

 तत्र ब्रह्मा समभवत्स तस्यैव प्रसादजः ||१५|| अह्नः क्षये ललाटाच्च सुतो
देवस्य वै तथा | क्रोधाविष्टस्य सञ्जज्ञे रुद्रः संहारकारकः ||१६||

एतौ द्वौ विबुधश्रेष्ठौ प्रसादक्रोधजौ स्मृतौ | तदादेशितपन्थानौ
सृष्टिसंहारकारकौ ||१७||

निमित्तमात्रं तावत्र सर्वप्राणिवरप्रदौ ||१७||

[These two, viz., Brahma and Rudra, are the foremost of all the
deities, having sprung respectively from the Propitiousness and the
Wrath (of Aniruddha). Acting according to Aniruddha's direction, these
two deities create and destroy. Although capable of granting boons
unto all creatures, they are, however, in the matter of the concerns
to which they attend (viz., Creation and Destruction), merely
instruments in the hands of Aniruddha.]


Now, a point regarding the Vishwaroopa darshana. To show that it has
nothing to do with Rudra, I will quote the Mahabharata itself. In the
Mahabharata, Krishna shows his Vishwraroopa again to Utanka at his
request and this Vishwaroopa is the same as what was seen by Arjuna.
The Mahabharata itself states it is a Vaishnava form (not a Shaiva
form, that one would expect, if it were Shiva). Here is the reference
from Mbh 14.54 -

उत्तङ्क उवाच||

अभिजानामि जगतः कर्तारं त्वां जनार्दन | नूनं भवत्प्रसादोऽयमिति मे
नास्ति संशयः ||१||

चित्तं च सुप्रसन्नं मे त्वद्भावगतमच्युत | विनिवृत्तश्च मे कोप इति
विद्धि परन्तप ||२||

यदि त्वनुग्रहं कञ्चित्त्वत्तोऽर्होऽहं जनार्दन | द्रष्टुमिच्छामि ते
रूपमैश्वरं तन्निदर्शय ||३||

वैशम्पायन उवाच||

ततः स तस्मै प्रीतात्मा दर्शयामास तद्वपुः | शाश्वतं वैष्णवं धीमान्ददृशे
यद्धनञ्जयः ||४||

[Gratified with him, the holy one then showed Utanka that eternal
Vaishnava form which Dhananjaya of great intelligence had seen.]


> The Supreme Atman is nirguna brahman in Advaita. Narayana is beyond avyakta.
> So, the deity Rudra if as a pati of a group is created, by the power of
> 'etc.' of the bhashya, the others who are left unlisted too who are patis of
> any group, are deemed to have been created. This conclusion is inescapable
> for anyone who follows Shankara's bhashya there.

Not sure what you are trying to prove. Narayana is supreme Atman
according to Shankara and is hence uncreated.


>
> Let me point out to you that by your above logic, the other entities listed
> in the Prashna mantra like Indra and surya are also Brahman, uncreated.

No, all their functions are possible due to brahman only. It is due to
brahman that everyone is able to function. Since you have
misunderstood me, I will skip the rest of your message.