[Advaita-l] Shankara authenticates Shiva

[Venkatesh Murthy]

Namaste

सर्वगतस्यापि ब्रह्मण उपलब्ध्यर्थं स्थानविशेषो न विरुध्यते, सालग्राम इव
विष्णोरित्येतदप्युक्तमेव

जीवपुर एवास्मिन् ब्रह्म सन्निहितमुपलक्ष्यते, यथा सालग्रामे विष्णुः सन्निहित इति,

यस्य ता अङ्गभूताः, तस्यैतस्य ब्रह्मणः साक्षादुपलब्ध्यर्थमुपासनार्थं च
हृदयाकाशः स्थानमुच्यते, सालग्राम इव विष्णोः

This comparison is made in Sankara Bhashya many times between Brahman
and Vishnu. Brahman is existing everywhere but may be in particular
place or thing LIKE Vishnu is in Salagrama.

In this comparison two things are compared. Brahman and Vishnu.

If Brahman and Vishnu are the SAME there will be no comparison.
Because when you compare two things A and B they cannot be the same.
Example - If I say to my wife your face is like moon it will not mean
her face is Moon itself. Moon is different and her face is different.
They are not the same. Only some qualities in moon like shining, white
and round shape are in her face. It is not possible for any person to
have Moon itself as the face.

Therefore when Sankara is comparing Brahman and Vishnu we must
conclude Brahman and Vishnu are different and not same. Some qualities
are common. Brahman is everywhere but we can meditate on Om thinking
Om is Brahman. Vishnu is all pervading but He can be worshipped in
Salagrama.

On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 11:16 AM, D Gayatri via Advaita-l
<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>> Shankara quotes from that portion not because Vishnu is superior but because
>> those portions are convenient for Shankara to teach the Advaitic Nirguna
>> Brahman. For Shankara that Narayana is beyond avyakta and therefore Nirguna.
>> That is why he cites from those poritons.
>
> For understanding who this Narayana is, one must look at his
> introduction to Gita bhashya where Shankara says that Narayana took
> birth as the son of Devaki and Vasudeva. Moreover, all the Adi parvan
> verses that I quoted earlier, also unanimously support this view point
> that Narayana took birth as Krishna. NB, being nishkriya, cannot take
> any avatAra. So, the contention that Narayana in this context is NB,
> does not hold any water.
>
>>
>>>
>>> He does not quote anything from the Shiva supremacy verses
>>
>>
>> This is not because he does not consider Shiva as superior but because those
>> portions may not be conveying the advaitic message Shankara looked for.
>
> Shankara separates the wheat from the chaff. So he does not quote any
> verses that praise Shiva as supreme. It is interesting to note that
> you already accept that Shiva-supremacy verses in Mbh may not be
> conveying advaitic message. That itself should prove that they are
> chaff rather than the wheat, as per Shankara. The Mbh also contains
> other verses which praise sAmkhya, yoga, etc. and are not quoted by
> Shankara for they do not convey advaitic message.
>
>
>>
>> The Rg Veda, the Brihadaranyaka, the Atharvashira and other scriptures
>> validate the fact of Vishnu being a created deity
>
> The RV 7.40.5 says Rudra derives his strength from Vishnu.
> The BU. 1.4.11 says Rudra-pashupathi is a created entity.
> The Satapatha Brahmana and Kaushitaki Brahmana say that Rudra is born
> from Prajapati.
> _______________________________________________
> 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



-- 
Regards

-Venkatesh