[Advaita-l] Shankara authenticates Shiva

[R Krishnamoorthy]

Dears
IMHO this sort of discussion will lead to more and more quotes from
relevant upanishads serving no purpose. By this what is required to be
achieved? "Whether Sri Sankara agrees that Sri Vishnu is the Brahman and
not SriShiva
Namaste

Based on Sruti or bhAshya refs, one may accept Vishnu as vedAntic Brahman
(Ishwara) while other may accept Shiva as vedAntic Brahman (Ishwara) while
some other may accept yet another. (at vyavahArika)

Why is there a need to establish or claim, based on these refs, that Vishnu
or Shiva alone as vedAntic Brahman, while refuting the other ?

Is it because of the reality is invested in both Vishnu and Shiva, that one
needs to be negated completely from Ishwaratva, so that the other alone can
be given the Ishwara status ?

Pl share the contextual background behind these sharings of viewpoints or
observations..

Thanks




On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 2:56 PM, D Gayatri via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> > For an academician let that part not be an interpolation.  For a
Vedantin
> > Shanakara only the Advaitic message is relevant. That alone is
> authenticated
> > by him in the MB and not the other peripheral things. So, there is no
> merit
> > in saying that Shankara authenticates Shiva as son of.....
>
> This is your personal opinion that though Shankara quoted from that
> passage, he authenticates only one aspect of that passage and not the
> other. That sounds very selective.
>
>
> > The mantra itself says 'iti' which Shankara comments as īti evamādīni'
> > =.'and other such cases ' showing that the list is not exhaustive. That
> is
> > why Shankara says 'it is well known.' Where is it well known? in the
> Yajur
> > Veda samhita.
>
> If Vishnu is included, then Shankara would have mentioned it, but he
> does not. That should end the matter. Moreover, since he says Vishnu
> is supreme at many other places, we cannot consider the above reading
> as valid.
>
>
> > For Shankara only the Nirguna Brahman is supreme.  That Narayana is the
> one
> > Turiya beyond avyakta. Nowhere in the Bhashya Shankara has identified
> that N
> > as the resident of vaikuntha, etc. For Shankara 'Parameshwara' can take
> any
> > illusory form out of will to bless an aspirant.' Narayana is a deity, is
> one
> > such form. And if it is a form then it is anātmā and abrahma for
> Shankara .
> > So, for Shankara the Supreme Brahman is Nirguna only which alone can be
> > identified as one's self.
>
>
> This part, I will probably reply in a separate thread shortly because
> it requires some prior discussion on related topics. So keep watching
> this space.
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>
_______________________________________________
Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita

To unsubscribe or change your options:
http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l

For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org